Allowed

M/S. Sastha Gold Works v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Kerala HC14 Mar 2024WP(C)/10704/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition challenged an income tax assessment for AY 2018-19 on the ground of natural justice violation: the assessing authority completed the assessment ignoring the petitioner's request for time to produce details. The court quashed the assessment order and restored proceedings for fresh completion after hearing.

What did the court decide?

Ext.P4 assessment order quashed; assessment for AY 2018-19 restored to 1st respondent for fresh completion after hearing; petitioner to upload documents within one week.

M/S. Sastha Gold Works Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax — Income Tax | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 24TH PHALGUNA, 1945

¶5

WP(C) NO. 10704 OF 2021

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

M/S. SASTHA GOLD WORKS
VI/628B, VATTANTHRA, ALAGAPPANAGAR,
THRISSUR-680 302,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER RAJU K.S.

¶8

BY ADVS.

¶9

SRI.A.KUMAR
SRI.P.J.ANILKUMAR
SMT.G.MINI(1748)
SRI.P.S.SREE PRASAD

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, ROOM NO. 401,
2ND FLOOR, E-RAMP, JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM,
DELHI -110 003.

¶12

2INCOME TAX OFFICER,
WARD 2(1), AAYAKAR BHAVAN,
SAKTAN THAMPURAN NAGAR, THRISSUR-680 001.

¶13

BY ADVS

¶14

JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX
CYRIAC TOM (SC)

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

¶16

14.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

W.P.(C) No.10704/2021

¶18

-:2:-

¶19

J U D G M E N T

¶20

The petitioner has approached this Court challenging Ext.P4 order of assessment issued under the provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2018-2019. The only ground upon which the assessment is challenged is violation of principles of natural justice.

¶21

According to the petitioner, on receipt of Ext.P1 show cause notice, the petitioner had submitted Ext.P2 request for 15 days time (till 19-04-2021) to produce certain details. It is submitted that Ext.P3 shows that Ext.P2 was received by the assessing authority. It is submitted that, however, by Ext.P4, the assessment was completed on 08-04-2021 without considering Ext.P2 request made by the petitioner.

¶22

The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Income-tax Department would submit that the petitioner is not entitled to any relief. It is submitted that several opportunities were given to the petitioner, as is evident

¶23

W.P.(C) No.10704/2021

¶24

-:3:-

¶25

from the impugned assessment order. It is submitted that the petitioner was purposefully trying to delay the completion of proceedings and therefore the request of the petitioner in Ext.P2 could not be considered. It is submitted that if the petitioner in any manner aggrieved by Ext.P4 order of assessment, it is for the petitioner to approach the Appellate Authority by filing a duly constituted appeal.

¶26

Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the Income-tax department, I am of the view that the petitioner is entitled to succeed. It is clear from Exts.P2 and P3 that the petitioner had made a request for grant of 15 days time to produce certain details before the assessing authority. The request was for time till 19-04-2021 to produce the details. However, the assessing authority without favouring the petitioner with any reply to Ext.P2 completed the assessment on 08-04-2021. This is clearly a violation of principles of natural justice. Therefore, Ext.P4 can be set aside notwithstanding the availability of any alternative

¶27

W.P.(C) No.10704/2021

¶28

-:4:-

¶29

remedy.

¶30

Accordingly, Ext.P4 will stand quashed and the assessment of the petitioner for the assessment year 2018-2019 will stand restored to the file of the 1^st respondent, who shall pass fresh orders after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and providing to the petitioner an opportunity to produce documents in support of its claim. The petitioner shall upload the necessary documents within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. Thereafter, the 1^st respondent shall complete the assessment proceedings afresh as above.

¶31

Writ petition is disposed of accordingly..

Sd/-

GOPINATH P.

JUDGE

ats

W.P.(C) No.10704/2021

¶37

-:5:-

¶38

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 10704/2021

¶39

PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS

¶40

EXHIBIT P1TRUE COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE, DATED
30.03.2021 ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶41

EXHIBIT P2TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 05.04.2021 TO
THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶42

EXHIBIT P3TRUE COPY OF SCREEN SHOT OF THE DASH BOARD
INDICATING THE RECEIPT OF THE RESPONSE.

¶43

EXHIBIT P4TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED
08.04.2021 ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶44

EXHIBIT P5TRUE COPY OF THE PENALTY NOTICE DATED
08.04.2021 ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT.

M/S. Sastha Gold Works v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Sastha Gold Works v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

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

Bharathan Suresh Babu, S/O.Late Bharathan, Vs State of Kerala

Antu Sebastian, Vs Kerala State Electricity Board

Harees M.U Vs the Village Officer

P.K. Pushpan Vs Union of India (Uoi)

Kamala Bai.v Vs the State of Kerala

Panthalur Service Co. Operative Bank Ltd. No. F 1651 Vs the Joint Registrar of Co. Operative Societies(G)