J U D G M E N T v. Heard The Learned Standing Counsel Appearing For Therespondents As Well

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE FRIDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF MAY 2016/20TH VAISAKHA 1938 WP(C).No. 17803 of 2016 (A) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------- M/S.ST.ALPHONSA TIMBER & TRADERS PRIVATE LIMITED KUNDANOOR, MARADU POST-682304, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR JESSY THOMAS. BY ADVS.SRI.O.RAMACHANDRAN NAMBIAR SRI.GEEN T.MATHEW RESPONDENT(S): -------------- 1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) OFFICE OF THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) KOCHI INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, C.R.BUILDINGS I.S.PRESS ROAD, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-682018. KOCHI INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, C.R.BUILDINGS I.S.PRESS ROAD, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-682018. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) III OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX APPEALS III1ST FLOOR, POORNIMA, 28/243, NEAR MANORAMA JUNCTION,PANAMPILLY NAGAR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-682036.1ST FLOOR, POORNIMA, 28/243, NEAR MANORAMA JUNCTION,PANAMPILLY NAGAR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-682036. R1 & R2 BY SRI.K.M.V.PANDALAI, THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20-05-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 17803 of 2016 (A) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ----------------------- P1:TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY R1 DT.22-7-15. P2: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY R1 DT.22-7-15. P3: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY R1 DT.22-7-15. P4: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY R1 DT.22-7-15. P5: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY R1 DT.22-7-15. P6: TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL IN EXT.P1 P6A: TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL IN EXT.P2 P6B: TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL IN EXT.P3 P6C: TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL IN EXT.P4 P6D: TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL IN EXT.P5 P7: TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE R2 IN EXT.P6A APPEAL.PETITIONER BEFORE R2 IN EXT.P6A APPEAL. P7A: TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE R2 IN EXT.P6B APPEALPETITIONER BEFORE R2 IN EXT.P6B APPEAL P7B: TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE R2 IN EXT.P6C APPEALPETITIONER BEFORE R2 IN EXT.P6C APPEAL P7C: TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE R2 IN EXT.P6D APPEALPETITIONER BEFORE R2 IN EXT.P6D APPEAL P7D: TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE R2 IN EXT.P6E APPEALPETITIONER BEFORE R2 IN EXT.P6E APPEAL P8: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DT.24-2-16 IN WPC 7074/16H BEFORE THIS HON'BLE COURT. BEFORE THIS HON'BLE COURT. P9: TRUE COPY OF THE STAY ORDER DT.11-4-16 ISSUED BY R2.R2. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:NIL. //TRUE COPY// bp P.A. TO JUDGE A.M. SHAFFIQUE, J.=============W.P. (C) No. 17803 of 2016=================== Dated this, the 20[th] day of May, 2016 J U D G M E N T Petitioner challenges Ext.P9, an order passed by theCommissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in a stay petition withreference to an appeal filed against orders passed for assessmentyears 2010-11 to 2014-2015. Petitioner submits that as againstthe judgment of this Court in WP(C) No. 14431/2014 (ExcelTimbers Private Limited v. Deputy Commissioner ofIncome Tax), appeals are heard by a Division Bench of this Courtand are reserved for orders. In the meantime, when the petitionerhas substantial contentions to be urged in the appeal, theauthority had called upon the petitioner to remit the entireamount demanded. It is contended that when substantialcontentions are urged in the appeal, the direction to pay entireamount is too harsh. 2.Heard the learned standing counsel appearing for therespondents as well. 3.A perusal of Ext.P9 would clearly indicate that the -:2:- 2.Heard the learned standing counsel appearing for therespondents as well. 3.A perusal of Ext.P9 would clearly indicate that the -:2:- appellate authority had considered the stay petition on merits. Aslaw stands today, the judgment in Excel Timbers PrivateLimited (supra) holds the field. Under such circumstances, I donot find any error in the order passed by the appellate authoritydirecting the petitioner to remit the amount demanded. Theauthority had further granted time to pay the amount in fourequal monthly instalments of `1,59,743/- each month, startingfrom May 2016. 4.Taking into consideration the fact that the appealagainst Excel Timbers Private Limited (supra) is reserved forjudgment by the Division Bench, I am of the view that someindulgence can be shown to the petitioner to remit the amountand accordingly, Ext.P9 is modified as under. 5.That the payment of `6,38,969/- shall be made in fourequal monthly instalments of `1,59,743/- each month, startingfrom 20/6/2016. Writ petition is disposed of as above. Rp20/05/2016 //True Copy// Sd/- A.M. SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE P.S to Judge