By Advs.harisankar v. Menonmeera V.menonr.sreejithk.krishnaparvathy Menon

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMPRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH TUESDAY, THE 19 DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 29TH PHALGUNA, 1945WP(C) NO. 19157 OF 2023 PETITIONER/S: THAYYIL BALAKRISHNAN PRADEEP,AGED 56 YEARSS/O. BALAKRISHNAN, THAYYIL HOUSE, KANIMANGALAM, PALISSERI, THRISSUR., PIN - 680027 BY ADVS.HARISANKAR V. MENONMEERA V.MENONR.SREEJITHK.KRISHNAPARVATHY MENON RESPONDENT/S: 1THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, WARD 2 (2), AAYAKAR BHAVAN,SAKTHAN THAMPURAN NAGAR, THRISSUR, PIN – 680001.INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, WARD 2 (2), AAYAKAR BHAVAN,SAKTHAN THAMPURAN NAGAR, THRISSUR, PIN – 680001. 2THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, SAKTHAN THAMPURAN NAGAR, THRISSUR, PIN – 680001. OTHER PRESENT: SRI. JOSE JOSEPH- SR.SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THEFOLLOWING: J U D G M E N T The present writ petition has been filedmainly seeking the following prayers: “(i) To quash Ext.P5 issued by the 2[nd]respondent by the issue of a writ ofcertiorari or such other writ or order ordirection. (ii) To direct the 2[nd] respondent tofurnish copies of the survey report as prayedfor in Ext.P4 application, at the earliest bythe issue of a writ of mandamus or such otherwrit or order or direction.” 2.Sri.Jose Joseph, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Revenue, submits that thepetitioner, in fact, is asking for a directionfrom this Court for providing survey reportprepared by the survey team while conductingsurvey under Section 132A of the Income Tax Act,1961. He further submits that the survey reportprepared at the time of survey in Form-E washanded over to the petitioner. It is alsosubmitted that while finalising the assessmentproceedings, the internal survey report prepared for departmental convenience has not been reliedupon. The petitioner is already in appeal againstthe assessment order. Every document andstatement relied upon by the assessing authoritywas supplied to the petitioner. Considering the fact that the petitioner isalready in appeal against the assessment order, heis entitled to take every ground, which isavailable to him under the law. However, there isno question of entertaining this writ petition,which this Court finds nothing but a tacticsapplied by the petitioner to delay the conclusionof the appellate proceedings. If the petitionerfeels that some documents relied upon by theassessing authority have not been supplied to himdespite demand, the same may be a ground tochallenge the assessment order. But, at thisbelated stage, the petitioner cannot approach thisCourt for a direction for supply of thedocuments/report. I find that this writ petitionis nothing, but an abuse of process of court andthesameisherebydismissed. Pending interlocutory application, if any, in the presentwrit petition stands dismissed. jg Sd/- JUDGE DINESH KUMAR SINGH APPENDIX OF WP(C) 19157/2023 PETITIONER EXHIBITS