Wa/345/2024 Of Cherupurath Mohammed Jeens v. The Income Tax Officer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN THURSDAY, THE 7 DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 17TH PHALGUNA, 1945 WA NO. 345 OF 2024 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN WP(C) NO.19373 OF 2023 OF HIGHCOURT OF KERALA APPELLANT/S/PETITIONER: CHERUPURATH MOHAMMED JEENSAGED 46 YEARSS/O C.P MUHAMMED KMC, 25/534 ALANKAR BUILDING KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 686691BY ADVS.DIVYA RAVINDRANJOSEPH MARKOSE (SR.) RESPONDENT/S/RESPONDENTS: 1THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1 & TPS MAHIMA TOWER, TEMPLE ROAD THODUPUZHA KERALA, PIN - 685588 2ASSESSMENT UNIT NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTERINCOME TAX DEPARTMENT MINISTRY OF FINANCE, ROOM NO. 401, 2 ND FLOOR E-RAMP, JAWAHARLAL STADIUM NEW DELHI REPRESENTED BY ITS INCOME TAX OFFICER, PIN - 110003INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT MINISTRY OF FINANCE, ROOM NO. 401, 2 ND FLOOR E-RAMP, JAWAHARLAL STADIUM NEW DELHI REPRESENTED BY ITS INCOME TAX OFFICER, PIN - 110003 3THE NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTREMAYUR BHAWAN, CONNAUGHT LANE, BARAKHAMBA ROAD, NEW DELHI REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (NAFAC)., PIN - 110001MAYUR BHAWAN, CONNAUGHT LANE, BARAKHAMBA ROAD, NEW DELHI REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (NAFAC)., PIN - 110001 4GEOJIT COMTRADE LTD10 TH FLOOR, GEOJIT FINANCIAL SERVICES BUILDING 34/659-P, CIVIL PIPELINE ROAD PADIVATTOM, KOCHI REPRESENTED BYITS CHIEF MANAGER- LEGAL., PIN - 68202410 TH FLOOR, GEOJIT FINANCIAL SERVICES BUILDING 34/659-P, CIVIL PIPELINE ROAD PADIVATTOM, KOCHI REPRESENTED BYITS CHIEF MANAGER- LEGAL., PIN - 682024 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.03.2024,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENTDated this the 7[th] day of March, 2024 A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE(J) This intracourt appeal arises from the judgment of the learnedSingle Judge in W.P.(C) No.19373 of 2023 dated 26.02.2024. Theappellant challenged Ext.P11 assessment order for the assessmentyear 2013 – 2014 dated 19.05.2023, after re-opening of theassessment under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act. The appellanthas a case that the assessment is barred by limitation by placingreliance on the proviso to Section 149 of the Income Tax Act. Thisaspect has not been considered. The learned Single Judge relegatedthe appellant to seek appellate remedy under the Income Tax Act. 2.Taking note of the fact that the issue relating to limitation hasnot been adverted, it is appropriate to set aside the assessment orderfor the assessment year 2013 – 2014 for re-consideration, afterhearing the petitioner. Accordingly, the assessment order is set asideas above for re-consideration and the Writ Appeal is accordinglydisposed of. Sd/- A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE Sd/- SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN, JUDGE