By Advs. Sri.harisankar v. Menon

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF MAY 2012/9TH JYAISHTA 1934 WP(C).No. 12454 of 2012 (F) --------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- M.A. MUHEYIDDIN, HAFIL, JUMA MASJID ROAD, PANAYIKULAM P.O., N.PARAVOOR VIA., PIN-683 511, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON, SMT.MEERA V.MENON, SRI.MAHESH V.MENON. RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL CIRCLE-I), ERNAKULAM- 682 013. ERNAKULAM- 682 013. 2. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-1, KOCHI-682 001. KOCHI-682 001. 3. INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOCHI BRANCH, 1ST FLOOR, KENDRIYA BHAVAN, KAKKANADU, KOCHI-682 037, REPRESENTED BY ITS ASST. REGISTRAR. KOCHI BRANCH, 1ST FLOOR, KENDRIYA BHAVAN, KAKKANADU, KOCHI-682 037, REPRESENTED BY ITS ASST. REGISTRAR. 4. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) 5TH FLOOR, KANDAMKULATHY TOWERS, M.G. ROAD, ERNAKULAM- 682 011. 5TH FLOOR, KANDAMKULATHY TOWERS, M.G. ROAD, ERNAKULAM- 682 011. BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, INCOME TAX. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30-05-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs. WP(C).No. 12454 of 2012 (F) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- EXT.P1COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 28/12/2009.1ST RESPONDENT DATED 28/12/2009. EXT.P1ACOPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 28/12/2009.1ST RESPONDENT DATED 28/12/2009. EXT.P1BCOPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 28/12/2009.1ST RESPONDENT DATED 28/12/2009. EXT.P1CCOPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 28/12/2009.1ST RESPONDENT DATED 28/12/2009. EXT.P1DCOPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 28/12/2009.1ST RESPONDENT DATED 28/12/2009. EXT.P1ECOPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 28/12/2009.1ST RESPONDENT DATED 28/12/2009. EXT.P1FCOPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 28/12/2009.1ST RESPONDENT DATED 28/12/2009. EXT.P2COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 23/12/2010.DATED 23/12/2010. EXT.P2ACOPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 23/12/2010.DATED 23/12/2010. EXT.P2BCOPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 23/12/2010.DATED 23/12/2010. EXT.P2CCOPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 23/12/2010.DATED 23/12/2010. EXT.P2DCOPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 23/12/2010.DATED 23/12/2010. EXT.P2ECOPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 23/12/2010.DATED 23/12/2010. EXT.P2FCOPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 23/12/2010.DATED 23/12/2010. WP(C).No. 12454 of 2012 (F) EXT.P3COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORETHE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 14/04/2011.THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 14/04/2011. EXT.P3ACOPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORETHE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 14/04/2011.THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 14/04/2011. EXT.P3BCOPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORETHE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 14/04/2011.THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 14/04/2011. EXT.P3CCOPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORETHE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 14/04/2011.THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 14/04/2011. EXT.P3DCOPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORETHE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 14/04/2011.THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 14/04/2011. EXT.P3ECOPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORETHE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 14/04/2011.THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 14/04/2011. EXT.P3FCOPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORETHE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 14/04/2011.THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 14/04/2011. EXT.P4COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 07/05/2012.DATED 07/05/2012. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE EXT.P3CCOPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORETHE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 14/04/2011.THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 14/04/2011. EXT.P3DCOPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORETHE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 14/04/2011.THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 14/04/2011. EXT.P3ECOPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORETHE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 14/04/2011.THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 14/04/2011. EXT.P3FCOPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORETHE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 14/04/2011.THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 14/04/2011. EXT.P4COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 07/05/2012.DATED 07/05/2012. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. --------------------------------------- W.P.(C). No. 12454 of 2012 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 30[th] day of May, 2012JUDGMENT Being aggrieved by Ext.P1 series assessment orders passed by the first respondent, the petitioner approached the secondrespondent challenging the same which did not turn to be fruitfulas desired as evident from Ext.P2 series orders, whereby, somecases were dismissed, though some of the cases were allowed inpart. It was in the said circumstances, that the petitioner hassought to challenge the above orders in the second round, byfiling Ext.P3 series appeals before the third respondent/Tribunal.It also remains a fact that the petitioner has approached thefourth respondent by filing a petition under Section 220 (6) of theIncome Tax Act for enabling the petitioner to have the benefit ofstay from satisfying the impugned liability during the pendency ofappeals before the Tribunal. 2. The said application dated 24.10.2011 was consideredby the fourth respondent, who dismissed the same as per Ext.P4 W.P.C. No.12454 of 2012 order dated 07.05.2012, directing the petitioner to satisfy 50% ofthe outstanding liability on 25.05.2012 and to clear the balanceamount by way of monthly instalments at the rate ofRs.5,00,000/-(Rupees five lakhs), which forms the basis forchallenge in this writ petition. 3. Heard the learned Standing Counsel appearing forrespondents 1, 2 and 4 as well. 4. On going through the materials on record, it is seen thatthe appeals were preferred by the petitioner before the thirdrespondent as early as on 14.04.2011, while the petition underSection 220 (6) was preferred before the fourth respondent onlyon 24.10.2011. There is no case for the petitioner that anyinterlocutory application for stay was preferred before the thirdrespondent, though the appeal was pending from 14.04.2011 (probably for the reason that a petition was already filed beforethe fourth respondent under Section 220 (6), which howevercame to be dismissed as per Ext.P4 order only on 07.05.2012). 5. However, taking note of the facts and circumstances andthat, the appeals are pending consideration before the third W.P.C. No.12454 of 2012 respondent for more than one year, this Court finds that it is forthe third respondent to consider the appeals and pass final orderson merits in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible. With the above observations, interference is declined andthe writ petition is dismissed. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. Kp/-