Single judge High Court refused to interfere with assessment and penalty orders on natural justice grounds. Court allowed petitioner to file an appeal with stay for 15 days.
Leave to file appeal within fifteen days on merits; stay of coercive steps for fifteen days; appeal to be heard expeditiously.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH
FRIDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2023 / 17TH AGRAHAYANA, 1945
WP(C) NO. 20400 OF 2023
PETITIONER:
SHAJU PACHELIL PATHROSE,
AGED 57 YEARS, XI/276A, PACHELIL HOUSE,
MUDAVOOR P. O., VAZHAPPILLY,
MUVATTUPUZHA, PIN – 686669.
BY ADVS.
SRI. ABRAHAM JOSEPH MARKOS
SRI. SHARAD JOSEPH KODANTHARA
SRI. ISAAC THOMAS
SRI. ALEXANDER JOSEPH MARKOS
SRI. JOHN VITHAYATHIL
SRI. P. G.CHANDAPILLAI ABRAHAM
SRI. AIBEL MATHEW SIBY
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INCOME TAX, INCOME TAX OFFICER, NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NEW DELHI, PIN – 110001.2 THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AYAKKAR BHAVAN, OLD RAILWAY STATION ROAD, KOCHI, PIN – 682018.3 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, MUVATTUPUZHA, PIN – 686669.BY ADV.
SRI. CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM – SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
08.12.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 20400 OF 2023
2
DINESH KUMAR SINGH, J.
W.P.(C) No.20400 of 2023
Dated this the 8th day of December, 2023
JUDGMENT
“The assessee has made high value cash transactions. Total credit during the period 01.01.2015 to 31.12.2015 is amounted to Rs. 6.91 crores out of which cash deposits is Rs. 5.88 crore, clearing is Rs. 41.22 lakhs, RTGS is Rs. 38.59 lakhs, NEFT is Rs. 19.55 lakhs.
WP(C) NO. 20400 OF 2023
3
In view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India & Ors. v. Ashish Aggarwal [ 2022 SCC Online SC 543], the said notice was treated to be a notice under Section 148A (b) of the IT Act, 1961. The Information/material relied upon for receiving the said notice was provided to the petitioner/assessee by the Assessing Authority on 24.05.2022 and the petitioner was asked to file reply to the said notice. In response to the said notice, the petitioner has furnished his reply. After considering the reply furnished by the petitioner to the notice under Section 148A (b) of the Income Tax Act, the Authority was of the opinion that it was a fit case for reopening and the case was reopened issuing notice under Section 148 dated 29.06.2022.”
WP(C) NO. 20400 OF 2023
4
petitioner/assessee and request for time to file the reply was made up to 20.05.2023. This fact is evident from Exhibit P-8, print out taken from the website of the Department. The petitioner was issued against a notice on 17.05.2023 and the petitioner asked for further time to 07.06.2023. In the meantime, the impugned assessment order has been passed on 24.05.2023.
WP(C) NO. 20400 OF 2023
5
against the assessment order. Petitioner instead of filing the appeal has approached this Court in this writ petition. Considering the fact that this writ petition has remained pending on file of this Court, the petitioner is permitted to file the appeal within period of fifteen days from today before the Appellate Authority and if the petitioner files the appeal against the assessment order within fifteen days, the Appellate Authority shall proceed to examine the appeal on merit as well as the stay application if any, filed along with the appeal. It is made clear that the Appellate Authority will not get into the question of limitation and the appeal should be heard and decided on merit inasmuch as this writ petition has been remain pending in the file of this Court. For a period of fifteen days no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner in pursuance to Exhibit P-11 impugned assessment order. The stay application should be decided expeditiously, preferably within a period of two months from the date of its filing.
Sd/DINESH KUMAR SINGH JUDGE
Svn
WP(C) NO. 20400 OF 2023
6
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 20400/2023
PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 |
TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 06.01.2023ISSUED UNDER SECTION 143(2) READ WITHSECTION 147 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 BYTHE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER |
|---|---|
EXHIBIT P2 |
TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AND REPLYDATED 19.01.2023 FILED BY THE PETITIONERBEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT |
EXHIBIT P3 |
TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 10.04.2023ISSUED UNDER SECTION 142(1) OF THE INCOMETAX ACT, 1961 BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT |
EXHIBIT P4 |
TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AND REPLYDATED 12.04.2023 FILED BY THE PETITIONERBEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT |
EXHIBIT P5 |
TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 24.04.2023ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THEPETITIONER |
EXHIBIT P6 |
TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 24.04.2023FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1STRESPONDENT |
EXHIBIT P7 |
TRUE COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED03.05.2023 ISSUED UNDER SECTION 144B OF THEINCOME TAX ACT BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THEPETITIONER |
EXHIBIT P8 |
TRUE COPY OF RESPONSE WITH ACKNOWLEDGEMENTOF THE PETITIONER |
EXHIBIT P9 |
TRUE COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED17.05.2023 ISSUED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER |
EXHIBIT P10 |
TRUE COPY OF THE RESPONSE DATED 18.05.2023FILED BY THE PETITIONER AND DULYACKNOWLEDGED BY THE DEPARTMENT |
WP(C) NO. 20400 OF 2023
7
EXHIBIT P11TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED
24.05.2023 ISSUED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER
EXHIBIT P12TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 22.11.2021
OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT IN W.P. (C)
NO.21524 / 2021
EXHIBIT P13TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 08.06.2023
OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT IN W.P. NO.15590 /
2023
EXHIBIT P14TRUE COPY OF THE PENALTY NOICE DATED
24.05.2023 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO
THE PETITIONER
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court can intervene in an income tax dispute where the petitioner has failed to file a reply within the extended deadline and has not exhausted the appellate remedy.
Whether the petitioner is permitted to file an appeal and seek a stay while the writ petition remains pending.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Union of India & Ors. v. Ashish AggarwalApplied¶26
Union of India & Ors. v. Ashish Aggarwal [ 2022 SCC Online SC 543] · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Shaju Pachelil Pathrose
The Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and others
Dinesh Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court