Dismissed

Shri.C.a.Latheef v. the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-Ii

Kerala HC26 May 2016WP(C)/3149/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala dismissed a writ petition challenging notices issued by the Tax Recovery Officer regarding the public auction of properties to recover income tax dues. The court held that pasting the writ petition was an attempt to delay recovery processes and found no illegality in the notices.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed with a cost of 10,000/- to be paid to the Mediation Centre attached to this Court.

Shri.C.a.Latheef Vs the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax… — Cheque Dishonour | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF MAY 2016/5TH JYAISHTA, 1938

¶5

WP(C).No. 3149 of 2015 (P)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

SHRI.C.A.LATHEEF CHETTIPARAMBIL HOUSE, ST.ANTONY'S ROAD, ELAMAKKARA, ERNAKULAM

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.RAMESH CHERIAN JOHN SRI.JOJO ISAAC NEYYARAPALLY

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, ERNAKULAM

¶11

2. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-III KERALA BHAVAN, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI

¶12

3. TAX RECOVERY OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE TAX RECOVERY OFFICER, KOCHI -2, C.R.BUILDING, I.S.PRESS ROAD, KOCHI - 682018

¶13

4. SHNRI.K.M.NASSARUDDIN, N.L.PROPERTIES AND DEVELOPERS, PALLIKUNNEL VEETTIL, NETOOR P.O., KOCHI - 682 034

¶14

*ADDL. R5 IMPLEADED :

¶15

5. THE TAHSILDAR KANAYANNOOR TALUK OFFICE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT COURT COMPLEX, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI.

¶16

ADDL. R5 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DT 10/9/2015 IN IA 12044/2015.

¶17

WP(C).No. 3149 of 2015 (P)

¶18

*ADDL. R6 IMPLEADED :

¶19

6. THE TAHSILDAR (SPECIAL) LAND ACQUISITION, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI.

¶20

R1 TO R3 BY ADV. SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL, BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC,

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26-05-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

¶23

WP(C).No. 3149 of 2015 (P)

¶24

APPENDIX

¶25

PETITION --------	ER(S)' EXHIBITS ---------------
P1:-	TRUE COPY OF THE PARTNERSHIP DEED DATED 30.1.2007
P2:-	TRUE COPY OF THE FORM OF APPEAL AND GROUNDS OF APPEAL FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-2003 OF THE PETITIONER
P3:-	TRUE COPY OF THE FORM OF APPEAL AND GROUNDS OF APPEAL FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-2009 OF THE PETITIONER
P4:-	TRUE COPY OF THE FORM OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 31.12.2009 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-2003 OF THE PETITIONER
P5:-	TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER 31.12.2009 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-2009 OF THE PETITIONER
P6:-	TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 12.1.20155 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TOT HE PETITIONER
P7:-	TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 12.1.2015 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER/PARTNERSHIP FIRM, I.E M/S.N.L. PROPERTIES AND DEVELOPERS
P8:-	TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 12.1.2015 ISSUED TOT HE 4TH RESPONDENT/PARTNERSHIP FIRM ,I.E.M/S.N.L. PROPERTIES AND DEVELOPERS
P9:-	TRUE COPY OF THE PAPER - CUTTING DATED 17.11.2011
P10:-	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 22.1.2015 FILED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT
P11:-	COPY OF THE SALE DEED RELATING TO THE ADJOINING PROPERTY COMPRISED IN RESURVEY NO. 328/6 IN AMBALLOOR VILLAGE TO THE PROPERTIES MENTIONED IN EXT P7.
P12:-	COPY OF THE NOTICE DT 10/9/2015 ISSUED BY THE ADDITIONAL R5.
RESPONDE	NT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL.
	//TRUE COPY//
	P.A. TO JUDGE

¶26

¶27

A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J.

¶28

------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.3149 of 2015

¶29

Dated this the 26^th day of May, 2016

¶30

J U D G M E N T

¶31

The petitioner by filing this writ petition was capable of delaying the process of sale of property initiated by the respondent authorities for recovering the Income Tax dues. The petitioner challenged Ext.P6 notice dated 12.01.2015 issued by the Tax Recovery Officer to the petitioner informing him about the settlement of proclamation on 06.05.2014 and the proposal to sell the property by public auction by 1^st week of February 2015. The petitioner was also served with another notice Ext.P7 dated 12.01.2015 in which three other items of properties were also mentioned. Ext.P6 had been issued for recovering Income Tax arrears for the assessment years 2002-03 to 2008-09. The amount involved is 1,24,20,733/-. Ext.P7 had been issued for recovering₹ Income Tax arrears for the years 2007-08 and 2008-09. The amount involved is 1,50,60,747/-. An interim order of stay had₹ been granted by this Court which was extended up to 22.05.2016.

¶32

The main contention urged by the petitioner is that the 3^rd respondent ought to have proceeded against the properties covered by Ext.P7 before proceeding with the sale of property covered by Ext.P6. When such huge amounts are due to the Department, I do not think that this Court will be justified in stalling the proceedings

¶33

W.P.(C) No.3149 of 2015

¶34

¶35

by interfering with the right of the Department to effect sale of the property. The recovery with reference to Ext.P6 is for certain assessment years and recovery proposed in terms of Ext.P7 was for certain other assessment years. Even otherwise, when sale proceedings are being taken by the Department, this Court will not be justified in interfering with such process, unless the assessee is ready and willing to remit any amount. Even during the pendency of the writ petition, no steps have been taken to remit any amount at all.

¶36

Going by the grounds raised in the writ petition, I don't find a single ground raising any illegality or irregularity to the notices issued. Exts.P6 and P7 apparently were only notices informing about the proclamation of the sale and the proposal to sell the property. This is a clear instance of abuse of process by which the proposal of revenue to recover the dues have been delayed without any legal jurisdiction.

¶37

This writ petition lacks bonafides and is dismissed with a cost of 10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) to be paid to the Mediation₹ Centre attached to this Court.

¶38

Sd/-

¶39

A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE.

¶40

Shri.C.a.Latheef v. the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-Ii

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri.C.a.Latheef v. the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-Ii

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Deepa Varghese Vs the District Collector

Libiya John Vs the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ernakulam

Sureshan Vs District Collector, Thrissur

C H Ali Vs the Federal Bank Limited

B. Sarathchandran Vs Davis a. Abraham

Bindu L. Vs Thiruvananthapuram Distirct Co-Operative Bank