By Advs. Sri.harisankar v. Menon, Smt.meera V.menon

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL 2016/12TH CHAITHRA, 1938 WP(C).No. 12692 of 2016 (J) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S):------------- T. ABHILASH CHANDRAN, 11/453, KONAKUPPAKKATTIL HOUSE, VELLASSERY, POOZHIKKOL P.O., KOTTAYAM-686 604. BY ADVS. SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON, SMT.MEERA V.MENON. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, ALFA-LIZA BUILDING, CHITTOR ROAD, ERNAKULAM-11. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, ALFA-LIZA BUILDING, CHITTOR ROAD, ERNAKULAM-11. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-V, ERNAKULAM-682 016. ERNAKULAM-682 016. 3. THE TAX OFFICER (CENTRAL), OFFICE OF THE TAX RECOVERY OFFICER, 5TH FLOOR, KANDAMKULATHI TOWERS, KOCHI-11. BY ADV. SRI.K.M.V.PANDALAI, SC rs. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01-04-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 12692 of 2016 (J) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- EXHIBIT P1: COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2009-10 DATED 30.03.2015.1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2009-10 DATED 30.03.2015. EXHIBIT P1(A): COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2010-11 DATED 30.03.2015.1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2010-11 DATED 30.03.2015.EXHIBIT P2: COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2009-10 DATED 05.09.2015.THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2009-10 DATED 05.09.2015. EXHIBIT P2(A): COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2010-11 DATED 05.09.2015.THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2010-11 DATED 05.09.2015. EXHIBIT P3: COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2009-10 DATED 05.09.2015.THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2009-10 DATED 05.09.2015. EXHIBIT P3(A): COPY OF STAY PETITION FLED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2010-11 DATED 05.09.2015.THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2010-11 DATED 05.09.2015. EXHIBIT P4: COPY OF ORDER PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 18.03.2016.DATED 18.03.2016. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE rs. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J. =========================================== W.P.(C). No. 12692 of 2016 ===================================================== Dated this the 1[st] day of April, 2016 JUDGMENT The challenge in the writ petition is against Ext.P4conditional order of stay passed in relation to the petitioner underthe Income Tax Act, in a stay application filed along with an appealagainst assessment orders for the assessment years 2009-10 and2010-11. It is the case of the petitioner in the writ petition that,while passing Ext.P4 order, the 2[nd] respondent did not exercise hisdiscretion validly. 2.I have heard the learned counsel appearing for thepetitioner as also the learned Standing Counsel appearing for theIncome Tax Department. 3.On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of thecase as also the submissions made across the bar, I find fromExt.P4 order that the 2[nd] respondent, while passing the said order,has considered the submissions of the petitioner on merits and hasgiven reasons for directing the petitioner to pay 25% of theoutstanding arrears on or before 31.03.2016. Under the saidcircumstances, I am of the view that Ext.P4 order does not call for W.P.(C). No. 12692 of 2016 any interference in these proceedings under Article 226 of theConstitution of India. The writ petition in its challenge againstExt.P4 order therefore fails and is accordingly, dismissed. 3.On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of thecase as also the submissions made across the bar, I find fromExt.P4 order that the 2[nd] respondent, while passing the said order,has considered the submissions of the petitioner on merits and hasgiven reasons for directing the petitioner to pay 25% of theoutstanding arrears on or before 31.03.2016. Under the saidcircumstances, I am of the view that Ext.P4 order does not call for W.P.(C). No. 12692 of 2016 any interference in these proceedings under Article 226 of theConstitution of India. The writ petition in its challenge againstExt.P4 order therefore fails and is accordingly, dismissed. Taking note of the plea of financial hardship urged on behalfof the petitioner, I direct that, if the petitioner pays the amountdirected to be paid in Ext.P4 order in four equal and successivemonthly installments commencing from 20.04.2016, then the sameshall be treated as in compliance with the directions in Ext.P4order and the 2[nd] respondent shall proceed with the appeal onmerits, thereafter. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the writpetition together with a copy of this judgment before the 2[nd]respondent for further action. Sd/-A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE