Wp(C)/14374/2023 Of Home Stone v. The Income Tax Officer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS TUESDAY, THE 6 DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 16TH JYAISHTA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 14374 OF 2023 PETITIONER: HOME STONE,22/684 OF MOONIYUR GRAMA PANCHAYAT, THAZHE CHELARI, VELIMUKKU POST, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, KERALA, INDIA -676317 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER MUHAMMED INSAMUL HAQUE T.K, S/O. HASSANKUTTY, AGED 31 YEARS 'THEERAM', PAINGOTTUR, CALICUT UNIVERSITY POST, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-, PIN - 673635BY ADV K.M.FIROZ RESPONDENT: THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD NO 2, TIRUR, INCOME TAX OFFICE, NO 20/1240. TARIFF BAZAR, TOWN HALL ROAD, TIRUR, KERALA, PIN - 676101BY ADV CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON06.06.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT Dated this the 6[th] day of June, 2023 The writ petition is filed to quash Exts.P5 orderand P6 notice passed by the respondent. 2. The petitioner's case is that pursuant toExt.P1 show cause notice issued under Section148(b) of the Income Tax Act, the petitioner hassubmitted a reply seeking enlargement of time tosubmit a detailed reply. The respondent issuedExt.P2 communication granting time to thepetitioner till 05.04.2023, which is evident byExt.P3. The petitioner submitted its reply alongwith ten documents as can be seen from Ext.P4proceedings. However, the respondent, withoutadverting to the reply and the documentssubmitted by the petitioner, has passed Ext.P5order and thereafter issued Ext.P6 consequentialnotice. Exts.P5 and P6 are passed in violation of theprinciples of natural justice and is arbitrary and capricious. Hence, the writ petition. 3. Heard; Sri.K.M Firoz, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.ChristopherAbraham, the learned Standing Counsel appearingfor the respondent. 4.Sri.K.M Firoz, reiterated the contentionsin the writ petition. 5.Learned Standing Counsel appearing forthe respondent submitted that as the respondenthas not considered the reply as well as thedocuments filed by the petitioner, Exts.P5 and P6can be set aside, directing the respondent toreconsider the matter a fresh. 6. Having considered the pleadings andmaterials on record and taking note of the fact thatthe respondent has not considered the reply as wellas the documents produced by the petitioner, Ideem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition inthe following manner: (i)Exts.P5 and P6 are set aside. WPC No.14374 of 2023 (ii)The respondent is directed to consider andfinalize Ext.P1 notice after adverting to the objectionsraised by the petitioner along with the documents, inaccordance with law, as expeditiously as possible at anyrate within a period of three months from the date ofreceipt of a certified copy of this judgment. AP/06-06 Sd/-C. S. DIASJUDGE APPENDIX OF WP(C) 14374/2023 P.A.TO JUDGE