Wa/1272/2012 Of Avara Haji v. The Income Tax Officer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HON'BLE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MRS.MANJULA CHELLUR & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE FRIDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF JULY 2012/15TH ASHADHA 1934 WA.No. 1272 of 2012 () ----------------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WPC.14204/2012 DATED 18-06-2012 --------------- APPELLANT/PETITIONER : -------------------------------------- AVARA HAJI, AGED 65 YEARS KATTUKANDAN HOUSE, KULIKKILIYAD P.O., KOTTAPPURAM PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678001. BY ADV. SRI.C.K.RAMAKRISHNAN RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT : --------------------------------------------- THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD NO.2, PALAKKAD-678001. BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06-07-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn MANJULA CHELLUR (Ag.CJ) & A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J. * * * * * * * * * * * * * W.A.No.1272 of 2012 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 6[th] day of July 2012 J U D G M E N T MANJULA CHELLUR,Ag.CJ Heard learned counsel for the appellant. 2.We have gone through the impugned order. Appeal isagainst the judgment in W.P.C.No.14204/2012 dated 18/06/2012by the learned Single Judge. Before the learned Single Judge,challenge was with regard to Ext.P6 order declining to condonethe delay of 1270 days by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal inI.T.A.No.483/2009. As a matter of fact, the appellant hereinapproached this Court on an earlier occasion inW.P.C.No.16414/2010 challenging the sustainability of Ext.P2notice demanding a sum of Rs.3,51,794/- for the assessment year1999-2000 and also Rs.3,855/- in respect of assessment year2005-2006. The said writ petition came to be dismissed. Lateron, he approached the Tribunal by filing second appeal alongwith a petition to condone the delay of 1270 days in filing theappeal. 3.In that view of the matter, the learned Judge wasjustified in saying that when the matter was disposed of on merits declining interference in the writ petition at the initialstage, there was no justification to approach the appellateauthority again with the delay of 1270 days in filing the appeal.Therefore the learned Single Judge was justified in saying thatthe Tribunal was justified in dismissing the application forcondonation of delay on the ground that the appellant wasapproaching wrong fora seeking for appropriate relief instead ofright forum. 4.In that view of the matter, we are of the opinion,though demand notice as per Ext.P2 was somewhere in the year2010, for almost more than 1200 days the appellant issuccessfully not paying the amount but approaching differentfora. We do not find any good ground to interfere with thejudgment of the learned Single Judge. Accordingly, appeal is dismissed. (sd/-) (MANJULA CHELLUR, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE) (sd/-) (A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE) jsr 07/07/2012 //True Copy// PA to Judge