Disposed

Nadarajan Neelakandan v. the Income Tax Officer

Kerala HC19 Nov 2020WP(C)/25364/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court directed the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to re-hear the petitioner's stay application and pass orders within two weeks, and to consider early disposal of the appeal given the petitioner's age.

What did the court decide?

Directed the 2nd Respondent to re-hear the stay application and pass orders within two weeks, and to consider early disposal of the appeal due to the petitioner's age.

Nadarajan Neelakandan Vs the Income Tax Officer — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020 / 28TH KARTHIKA, 1942

¶5

WP(C).No.25364 OF 2020(U)

¶6

PETITIONER :

¶7

NADARAJAN NEELAKANDAN AGED 80 YEARS S/O.NEELAKANDAN,GURUVIHAR, KUNNATHUMALA,VADASSERIKONAM, POST-695143, CHEMMARUTHY VILLAGE,VARKALA TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADVS. SRI.O.RAMACHANDRAN NAMBIAR SRI.GEEN T.MATHEW

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(2),KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695003.

¶11

2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS), OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS),KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695003.

¶12

R BY SRI CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM - STANDING COUNSEL

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19.11.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

-2-

¶15

WP(C).No.25364 OF 2020(U)

¶16

JUDGMENT

¶17

The petitioner, who is an assesee on the file of the 1^st respondent, has filed Ext.P2 appeal dated 18.01.2019 before the 2^nd respondent Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) invoking the provisions under Section 246A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, feeling aggrieved by Ext.P1 demand notice and assessment order dated 21.12.2018 issued by the 1^st respondent for the assessment year 2015-16. The petitioner has also filed Ext.P3 application for stay dated 09.10.2019 in Ext.P2 appeal. The grievance of the petitioner is that though Ext.P3 application for stay was heard on 31.10.2019, based on Ext.P4 notice dated 18.10.2019, the 2^nd respondent is yet to pass orders on that application. The learned counsel for the petitioner would point out that the petitioner is a senior citizen aged 80 years and that, Ext.P2 appeal, which is one filed on 18.01.2019, requires an early disposal. The petitioner has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the 2^nd respondent to hear the petitioner and the 1^st respondent and

¶18

-3-

¶19

WP(C).No.25364 OF 2020(U)

¶20

dispose of Ext.P2 appeal and Ext.P3 stay petition, within a time limit to be fixed by this Court.

¶21

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department.

¶22

The learned Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department would submit that though Ext.P2 appeal filed by the petitioner is ripe for hearing, due to pendency of large number of appeals, the 2^nd respondent requires further time for final disposal of that appeal. The 2^nd respondent shall pass orders on Ext.P3 application for stay within a time limit to be fixed by this Court.

¶23

Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides, this Court deem it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition by directing the 2^nd respondent to conduct a re-hearing on Ext.P3 application for stay, with notice to the petitioner, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment, and pass orders on that application, within a further period of two

¶24

-4-

¶25

WP(C).No.25364 OF 2020(U)

¶26

weeks. The 2^nd respondent shall also consider the request of the petitioner for early disposal of Ext.P2 appeal, considering

¶27

the fact that he is a senior citizen aged 80 years.

¶28

Sd/-

¶29

ANIL K.NARENDRAN, JUDGE

¶30

AV/20/11

¶31

-5-

¶32

WP(C).No.25364 OF 2020(U)

¶33

APPENDIX

¶34

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶35

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND DEMAND NOTICE DATED 21.12.2018 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶36

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL.

¶37

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 09.10.2019 FILED IN EXHIBIT P2 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶38

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LETER NO.ITBA/COM/F/17/2019-20/1019062994(1) DATED 18.10.2019 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

¶39

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE URGENT HEARING PETITION DATED 14.03.2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT

¶40

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE URGENT HEARING PETITION DATED 17.09.2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Nadarajan Neelakandan v. the Income Tax Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nadarajan Neelakandan v. the Income Tax Officer

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

Tono Thomas Vs Ms.v.Asha

Anil Kumar N. Vs State of Kerala

The Laxmi Meghan Educational Trust Vs the State of Kerala

Kerala University of Health Sciences Vs Mgm Silver Jubilee College of Pharmacy

Devassy P.J., Vs Susheela Nair V.A.

Champakara Road Lines Vs Assistant Provident Fund Commissiner