By Advs.harisankar v. Menonmeera V.menon

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P. WEDNESDAY, THE 25 DAY OF MAY 2022 / 4TH JYAISHTA, 1944 WA NO. 587 OF 2022 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 15721/2022 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA APPELLANT/PETITIONER: ANILKUMAR 2/435, CHANDRALAYAM VELIKKAD, MUNDUR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, OTTAPALAM, PALAKKAD - 678592. BY ADVS.HARISANKAR V. MENONMEERA V.MENON RESPONDENTS: 1THE ADDL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME TAX OFFICERNATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI - 110 001. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, 2NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE INCOME TAX (APPEALS). DELHI - 110001, REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF BY SRI. JOSE JOSEPH, SC THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON25.05.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR & MOHAMMED NIAS C.P., JJ ------------------------------------------------------------------ WA No. 587 of 2022 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 25[th] day of May, 2022 JUDGMENT A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar, J. This writ appeal has been preferred against the judgmentdated 10.05.2022 of a learned single Judge in WP(C)No.15721 of2022. The brief facts necessary for the disposal of the writ appeal areas follows:- The writ petitioner, who was served with Ext.P1 order ofpenalty under the Income Tax Act preferred Ext.P2 appeal along withExt.P3 stay petition before the second respondent-National facelessAppeal Centre. The writ petition was preferred before this Courtseeking a direction to the second respondent to consider and passorders on the appeal/stay petition and to keep in abeyance therecovery steps initiated pursuant to Ext.P1 penalty order in themeanwhile. 2.The learned single Judge, who considered the matterdisposed the writ petition by directing the second respondent to consider and dispose of Ext.P2 appeal at the earliest, leaving libertyto the said respondents to take up Ext.P3 stay petition also and passorders on the same within three months from the date of receipt of acopy of the judgment. The learned single Judge did not however staythe recovery proceedings in the meanwhile. It is aggrieved by thejudgment to the extent is does not grant the stay of recovery of theconfirmed amounts pending disposal of the appeal/stay petition thatthe appellant is now before us. 3.We heard Sri.Harishankar V.Menon, the learned counselfor the appellant and Sri.Jose Joseph, the learned standing counselfor the Income tax. 4.On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of thecase and the submission made across the Bar, we deem it appropriateto allow this appeal by directing the appropriate authority to considerand pass orders on Ext.P2 appeal preferred by the appellant againstExt.P1 penalty order within a period of three months from the date ofreceipt of a copy of this judgment. The second respondent shall issueappropriate directions to the appropriate authority identified by itfor the purposes of complying with the aforesaid direction of thisCourt. 5.Needless to say, till such time orders are passed by the appropriate authority and the orders communicated to the appellant,the recovery steps for recovery of amounts confirmed against theappellant by Ext.P1 penalty order shall kept in abeyance. Writ appeal is disposed as above. Sd/- A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE Sd/- MOHAMMED NIAS C.P., dlk 25.5.22 JUDGE