Rp/234/2015 Of S.k.pillai v. The Income-Tax Commissioner

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR SATURDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF NOVEMBER 2015/30TH KARTHIKA, 1937 RP.No. 234 of 2015 (H) ------------------------------- JUDGMENT DATED 31-05-2004 IN WP(C) 16875/2003 ......... REVIEW PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONER: ------------------------------------------------------ S.K.PILLAI, USHA BELHEAVEN GARDENS, KOWDIAR, TRIVANDRUM - 695 003. BY ADVS.SRI.R.S.KALKURA SRI.M.S.KALESH SRI.HARISH GOPINATH SMT.R.BINDU SRI.GENS GEORGE ELAVINAMANNIL RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS: ------------------------------------------------ 1. THE INCOME-TAX COMMISSIONER, TRIVANDRUM - 695 001. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INVESTIGATION, KOTTAYAM - 686 001. 3. KHALEEL REHMAN, MANGALATHU VEEDU, KRISHNAPURAM P.O., KAYAMKULAM - 690 533. KAYAMKULAM - 690 533. 4. MANSURAL HAQUE, MANGALATHU VEEDU, KRISHNAPURAM P.O., KAYAMKULAM - 690 533. 5. KAYAMKULAM MUNICIPALITY, KAYAMKULAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY - 690 533. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.LILLY K.T. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX R5 BY ADV. SRI.A.SHAFEEK (KAYAMKULAM) THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21-11-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: RP.No. 234 of 2015 (H) ------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES: ANNEUXRE A1: CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD.31.5.2004 IN WPC.NO.16875 OF 2003 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. ANNEXURE A2: TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN OS.29/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE SUBORDINATE JUDGE'S COURT, MAVELIKKARA. SUBORDINATE JUDGE'S COURT, MAVELIKKARA. ANNEUXRE A3: TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT FILED BY RESPONDENTS 3 AND 4 IN OS.29 OF 2013 ON THE FILE OF THE SUBORDINATE JUDGE'S COURT, MAVELIKKARA. 3 AND 4 IN OS.29 OF 2013 ON THE FILE OF THE SUBORDINATE JUDGE'S COURT, MAVELIKKARA. ANNEXURE A4: TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DT.14.10.2014 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER FOR INCOME-TAX. PETITIONER BEFORE THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER FOR INCOME-TAX. ANNEXURE A5: TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DTD.10.11.2014 ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER FOR INCOME TAX REJECTING THE APPLICATION. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER FOR INCOME TAX REJECTING THE APPLICATION. ANNEXURE A6: TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DTD.1.12.2014 ISSUED BY THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-I, TO THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-I, KOTTAYAM. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-I, TO THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-I, KOTTAYAM. ANNEXURE A7: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER 15.12.2014 ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-I, KOTTAYAM. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-I, KOTTAYAM. RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES: ANNEXURE R3(a): TRUE COPY OF THE NO OBJECTION LETTER DTD.3.3.1997 SUBMITTED BY US BEFORE THE 5TH RESPONDENT. SUBMITTED BY US BEFORE THE 5TH RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE R3(b): TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE SHOPPING COMPLEX OF THE PETITIONER AND OUR PROPERTY IN HIS POSSESSION. COMPLEX OF THE PETITIONER AND OUR PROPERTY IN HIS POSSESSION. ANNEXURE R3(c): TRUE COPY OF ORDER DTD.3.3.2005 OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEAL). INCOME TAX (APPEAL). ANNEXURE R3(d): TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DTD.2.8.2005 SEND BY THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOTTAYAM TO 2ND RESPONDENT. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOTTAYAM TO 2ND RESPONDENT. CMA.NO.85/2015 IN RP.NO.234/2015 ANNEXURE R3(a): TRUE COPY OF THE OS.NO.158/2007 FILED BY TE PETITIONER. ANNEXURE R3(b): TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT FILED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT. Msv/ RP.No. 234 of 2015 (H) ------------------------------- ANNEUXRE R3(c): TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT AND PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN OS.158/2008. ANNEXURE R2(a): COPY OF STATEMENT FILED IN THE WRIT PETITION. ANNEXURE R3(c): TRUE COPY OF ORDER DTD.3.3.2005 OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEAL). INCOME TAX (APPEAL). ANNEXURE R3(d): TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DTD.2.8.2005 SEND BY THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOTTAYAM TO 2ND RESPONDENT. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOTTAYAM TO 2ND RESPONDENT. CMA.NO.85/2015 IN RP.NO.234/2015 ANNEXURE R3(a): TRUE COPY OF THE OS.NO.158/2007 FILED BY TE PETITIONER. ANNEXURE R3(b): TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT FILED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT. Msv/ RP.No. 234 of 2015 (H) ------------------------------- ANNEUXRE R3(c): TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT AND PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN OS.158/2008. ANNEXURE R2(a): COPY OF STATEMENT FILED IN THE WRIT PETITION. ANNEXURE R2(b): TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ADDRESSED TO THE TAX RECOVERY OFFICER, KOTTAYAM FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICER DTD.20.7.2015. ANNEXURE R2(c): TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDING OF THE TAX RECOVERY OFFICER DTD.3.9.2015. OFFICER DTD.3.9.2015. //TRUE COPY// P.S.TO JUDGE Msv/ A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J. =========================================== R.P. No. 234 of 2015INW.P.(C). No. 16875 of 2003 =====================================================Dated this the 21[st] day of November, 2015 JUDGMENT The review petition is filed seeking a review of the judgmentdated 31.05.2004 in WP(C) No.16875 of 2003 so as to clarify thatthe statement made by the respondents 3 and 4 that payments hadbeen made to the Income Tax department, as recorded in the saidjudgment, is erroneous. 2.I have heard the learned counsel appearing for thereview petitioner, the learned counsel appearing for the 3[rd] and 4[th]respondents in the review petition, as also the learned StandingCounsel appearing for the Income Tax Department. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the caseas also the submissions made across the bar, I find that the writpetition was filed challenging an order of attachment that waspassed by the Income Tax department in respect of propertiesbelonging to the 4[th] respondent in the writ petition. The writpetition was disposed by recording the statement of the learnedStanding Counsel for the Income Tax Department that theattachment had been lifted and on finding, therefore, that there RP. No. 234 of 2015 in W.P.(C). No. 16875 of 2003 was no attachment at the time of disposing the writ petition. Inthe judgment, the statement of counsel for respondents 3 and 4 tothe effect that, they had made payments to the Income TaxDepartment was also recorded. In response to the review petitionnow filed by the writ petitioner, a statement has been filed by thelearned Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department,clarifying that the statement rendered at the time of disposal ofthe writ petition that the attachment had been lifted was areference to the attachment that had lapsed by efflux of time interms of Section 281(b) of the Income Tax Act. I find therefore,that inasmuch as the judgment dated 31.05.2004, closed the writpetition after recording the statement of Standing Counsel for theIncome Tax Department, that there was no attachment in force,there is no new factual aspect warranting a review of the saidfinding in the judgment. Counsel for the review petitioner,however, points out that the statement of counsel for respondents3 and 4, to the effect that payments had been made to the IncomeTax Department, which was recorded in the said judgment, iscausing some confusion in the civil litigation, that is pendingbetween the petitioner and the respondents 3 and 4. Taking noteof the said submission, while dismissing the review petition, I RP. No. 234 of 2015 in W.P.(C). No. 16875 of 2003 RP. No. 234 of 2015 in W.P.(C). No. 16875 of 2003 make it clear that the judgment dated 31.05.2004 of this Court inWP(C) 16875 of 2003 has not pronounced on the correctness ofthe statement made by counsel for respondents 3 and 4 thatpayments have been made to the Income Tax Department. If thereview petitioner has a case that the payments have not beenmade by the respondents 3 and 4 to the Income Tax Department, itis for him to establish these facts independently before the CivilCourt, where proceedings are stated to be pending between thepetitioner and respondents 3 and 4. sd/- A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE