Wp(C)/12823/2023 Of V Mariyappan Chettiar Sons v. Income Tax Officer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMPRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI TUESDAY, THE 11 DAY OF APRIL 2023 / 21ST CHAITHRA, 1945WP(C) NO. 12823 OF 2023 PETITIONER: V.MARIYAPPAN CHETTIAR SONS, T.C18/1056 & 1057, RICE BAZAR, THRISSUR – 680001THRISSUR DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, SHRI.KRISHNAKUMAR S. BY ADV TOMSON T.EMMANUEL RESPONDENTS: 1INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2(3), THRISSUR RANGE-2, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, SAKTHAN NAGAR, THRISSUR – 680001 2ASSESSMENT UNIT/TECHNICAL UNIT/REVIEW UNIT, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI - 110001, REPRESENTED BY ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME TAX OFFICER. 3PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CORPORATE RANGE1, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, I S PRESS ROAD, COCHIN - 682018 SRI. JOSE JOSEPH, SC. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON11.04.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT Admit. The learned Standing Counsel takes notice for therespondent. The petitioner has approached this Court challenging an order of assessment made. It is a case of the petitioner that afterremand by the Tribunal, the officer has again gone ahead toassess the petitioner based on aspects which have already becomefinal by the order of the Tribunal. There is also a contention thatthe petitioner was not given an opportunity of hearing. The mainground for filing the writ petition is that the petitioner was notsupplied with a draft assessment order as is required underSection 144. The said contention does not appear to be justifiedsince the petitioner cannot be treated as an eligible assesseeunder Section 144C sub-clause 15. The petitioner has a remedyunder the statute. In view of the fact that factual aspects areinvolved, it is only proper that the petitioner avails statutoryremedy rather than invoke the jurisdiction of this Court. The writpetition is hence disposed of directing the petitioner to approach the appropriate authority with an appeal. If the petitioner preferssuch an appeal within two weeks, the same shall be consideredand orders issued within four months therefrom. The coercivesteps against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance till disposalof the appeal as directed to be filed. Sd/-T.R.RAVIJUDGE APPENDIX OF WP(C) 12823/2023 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P8 Exhibit P9 Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF ONLINE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 20.03.2023 ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT, FOR AY: 2014-15. TRUE COPY OF REPLY DATED 23.03.2023 SUBMITTED UNDER E-FILING ACCOUNT, AGAINSTEXT P8 SHOW CAUSE NOTICE. TRUE COPY OF ONLINE FACELESS ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S.143(3) READ WITH SEC.254 AND 144B OF IT ACT PASSED BY 2ND RESPONDENT, FOR AY:2014-15 WITHOUT PROVIDING A DRAFT ASSESSMENT ORDER.