Kerala High Court
Jose Chacko vs The Assistant Commissioner Of Income ... on 7 February, 2020
Author: S.V.Bhatti
Bench: S.V.Bhatti
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI
FRIDAY, THE 07TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 18TH MAGHA, 1941
WP(C).No.3409 OF 2020(A)
PETITIONER:
JOSE CHACKO
AGED 56 YEARS
DELTA WOOD PANELS,DELTA BUILDING,IRINGOLE.P.O,
PERUMBAVOOR,ERNAKULAM-683548.
BY ADVS.
SRI.T.M.SREEDHARAN (SR.)
SMT.NISHA JOHN
SRI.V.P.NARAYANAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
CIRCLE-1,ALUVA RANGE,R.S.ROAD,
ALUVA-683101.
2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS),
28/243,'POORNIMA',PANAMPILLY NAGAR,
COCHIN-682036.
OTHER PRESENT:
SC JOS WINSON FOR CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
07.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.3409 OF 2020(A)
2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 7th day of February, 2020 The petitioner filed appeal in Ext.P2 aggrieved by the orders of assessment in Ext.P1 made under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act. The petitioner has filed appeal with Ext.P3 stay petition. The petitioner prays for appropriate direction to the appellate authority to consider and dispose of Ext.P3 stay petition expeditiously.
2. The case of petitioner is that either the mere filing of appeal or mere pendency of appeal does not amount to granting stay by the appellate authority. The delay in considering and disposing of Ext.P3 stay petition results in the assessing officer taking steps for recovering the tax amount which is under challenge in Ext.P2 appeal petition. The assessing officer, if is successful in his effort the statutory appeal would become either academic or ineffective. It is further contended by the petitioner that in the manner the law provides for protecting the interest of appellant pending appeal, the orders on delay petition and stay petition are passed expeditiously. Hence the writ petition. WP(C).No.3409 OF 2020(A) 3
3. Perused Exts.P1 assessment order, P2 appeal and P3 stay petition. Prima facie I am satisfied that a case is made out for issuing necessary directions to 2 nd respondent to dispose of Ext.P2 appeal and Ext.P3 stay petition respectively.
Having regard to the limited prayer and the grounds referred to above, this Court is satisfied that the writ petition can be disposed of by this order:
(a) The appellate authority/2nd respondent considers and disposes of Ext.P3 stay application as early as possible, preferably within two months from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment.
(b) The respondents are directed not to take coercive steps or recover the amounts determined in the orders under appeal for ten weeks from today.
Sd/-
S.V.BHATTI
Dxy JUDGE
WP(C).No.3409 OF 2020(A)
4
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED
24.12.2019 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR AY-2017-18 ALONG WITH DEMAND NOTICE & COMPUTATION OF INCOME.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL E-FILED ON 14.01.2020 FOR AY-2017-18 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 09.01.2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR AY-2017- 18.