Allowed

Ibs Software Private Limited v. The Union of India

Kerala HC5 Apr 2024WP(C)/14207/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed Writ Petition of IBS Software, holding that CBDT Circular No. 1914/1993 (with amended OM) applies to appeals before ITAT. Court directed ITAT to decide stay petition expeditiously within two months and stayed impugned demand notice.

What did the court decide?

Stay on impugned notice P-9 for two months while ITAT decides stay petition; ITAT directed to dispose expeditiously within two months.

Ibs Software Private Limited Vs The Union of India — Income Tax | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 16TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 14207 OF 2024

¶5

PETITIONER:

¶6

IBS SOFTWARE PRIVATE LIMITED,
521-524 NILA, TECHNOPARK CAMPUS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM ,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER -
MR. ASHISH NANDA, PIN – 695581.

¶7

BY ADVS.

¶8

 SRI. RAJA KANNAN
 SRI. M. GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR

¶9

 SRI. K. JOHN MATHAI

¶10

 SRI. JOSON MANAVALAN

¶11

 SRI. KURYAN THOMAS

¶12

 SRI. PAULOSE C. ABRAHAM

¶13

RESPONDENTS:

¶14

1 THE UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS REVENUE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NEW DELHI, PIN – 110004.

¶15

2 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1 (1), 2. AAYAKAR BHAWAN, KAWADIAR P. O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695003.

¶16

3 THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, FIRST FLOOR, KENDRIYA BHAVAN, KAKKANAD, KOCHI REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, PIN – 682037.

¶17

BY ADVS.

¶18

 SRI. P. G. JAYASHANKAR - SC
 SRI. G. KEERTHIVAS - SC

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
05.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

WP(C) NO. 14207 OF 2024

¶21

¶22

DINESH KUMAR SINGH, J.

¶23

W.P.(C) No. 14207 of 2024

¶24

Dated this the 5^th day of April, 2024

¶25

JUDGMENT

¶26

The present writ petition has been filed impugning Exhibit P-9 notice issued by the 2^nd respondent directing the petitioner to deposit entire assessed tax, penalty, interest etc., which comes to Rs. 21,21,12,860/-.

¶27

The petitioner has filed Exhibit P-2 appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) against the assessment order in Exhibit P-1, along with the stay petition in Exhibit P-8.

¶28

The assessment order has been finalised under the provisions of Section 143(3) read with Section 144C of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Against the assessment order finalised under Section 144C, the appeal lies only before the ITC and not before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)].

¶29

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that CBDT Circular No. 1914/1993 and para 4 of the OM with F. No. 404/72/93-ITCC dated 29.02.2016, which is amended in the year 2017, if an assessee deposits 20% of the assessed tax, till the decision of the appeal before the 1^st appellate authority, the remaining amount should not

¶30

WP(C) NO. 14207 OF 2024

¶31

¶32

be enforced.

¶33

Mr. G. Keerthivas, learned Counsel for the Income Tax Department, however, submits that the above Circular is applicable only in case of the appeals filed before the CIT(A) and it is not applicable in respect of the appeals which are filed before the ITAT and, therefore, the petitioner, an assessee cannot contend that since he has deposited 20% of the assessed tax, penalty, interest etc., the remaining amount should not be realised as there is no interim order passed by the ITAT.

¶34

I have considered the submissions. The intent of the Circular is to grant protection to an assessee from further recovery till his stay petition is considered by the appellate authority, if the assessee deposits 20% of the assessed tax, penalty, interest etc. In the present case, the appeal against the assessment order lies only before the ITAT. Therefore, I am of the considered view that, considering the intent of the Circular No. 1914/1993 read with OM dated 29.02.2016 (amended in the year 2017), the Circular be applicable in the case the appeal against the assessment order lies only before the ITAT.

¶35

In view thereof, the present writ petition is disposed of with direction to the 3^rd respondent ITAT to consider and decide the stay

¶36

WP(C) NO. 14207 OF 2024

¶37

¶38

petition in Exhibit P-8 filed by the petitioner along with the appeal in Exhibit P-2 expeditiously, preferably within a period of two months. For a period of two months, the impugned notice in Exhibit

¶39

P-9 shall not be given effect to.

¶40

Sd/-

¶41

DINESH KUMAR SINGH

¶42

JUDGE

¶43

Svn

¶44

WP(C) NO. 14207 OF 2024

¶45

¶46

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 14207/2024

¶47

PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS

¶48

`Exhibit P1`	`THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF ASSESSMENT DATED` `24.02.2022, ALONG WITH COMPUTATION SHEET AND` `DEMAND NOTICE (BOTH EVEN DATED) PASSED BY THE 2ND` `RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 143(3) READ WITH SECTION` `144C (13) OF THE ACT FOR THE A.Y 2017-18`
`Exhibit P2`	`THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM (WITHOUT` `ANNEXURES) DATED 24.03.2022 FILED BY THE` `PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT, CHALLENGING` `EXT.P1 ORDER`
`Exhibit P3`	`THE TRUE COPY OF THE CHALLAN NO. 11803 DATED` `24.03.2022, EVIDENCING THE PAYMENT OF RS.` `4,25,00,000/-, TOWARDS 20% OF THE DEMAND AS PER` `EXT.P1 ORDER`
`Exhibit P4`	`THE TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER (WITHOUT ANNEXURES)` `DATED 25.03.2022 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE` `THE 2ND RESPONDENT`
`Exhibit P5`	`THE TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER (WITHOUT ANNEXURES)` `DATED 11.03.2024 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE` `THE 2ND RESPONDENT`
`Exhibit P6`	`THE TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 07.03.2024` `ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE A.Y 2017-18`
`Exhibit P7`	`THE TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 19.03.2024` `FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT`
`Exhibit P8`	`THE TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION (WITHOUT` `ANNEXURES) DATED 18.03.2024 FILED BY THE` `PETITIONER BEFORE THE OFFICE OF THE 3RD` `RESPONDENT, FOR THE A.Y 2017-18`
`Exhibit P9`	`THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED` `25.03.2024 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT, FOR THE` `A.Y 2017-18`
`Exhibit P10`	`THE TRUE COPY OF THE E-MAIL COMMUNICATION DATED` `02.04.2024, 11.03.2024 AND 07.03.2024, BETWEEN` `THE PETITIONER AND THE 2ND RESPONDENT`

Ibs Software Private Limited v. The Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ibs Software Private Limited v. The Union of India

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

Snehatheeram Charitable Trust, Vs Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption)

Hephsy Prabha Biju Rep. by Her Pa Holder Baiju P Abraham Vs Kochi Corporation

M/S. Baby Marine International, Vs Union of India

Gayathri. J.a, Vs the Intelligence Officer, Intelligence Unit

Centre C Edtech Private Limited, Vs the Intelligence Officer

Gopalan, Vs the Ramanattukara Municipality