Wp(C)/16700/2022 Of Abdussalam v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax (Bpu)
High Court
01 Jun 2022 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Wp(C)/16700/2022 Of Abdussalam v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax (Bpu)
Date of order
01 Jun 2022
Assessment year(s)
2019-20, 2020-21, 2021-22
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Wp(C)/16700/2022 Of Abdussalam v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax (Bpu), the High Court (2022) decided the matter.
Decision: Taking into account the submissions made by both sides, thiswrit petition will stand disposed of directing that if the petitionerfiles a composite reply to Ext.P13 notice on or before 10.06.2022,the competent authority shall take a decision on any jurisdictionalissue raised by the petitioner in the...
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
WEDNESDAY, THE 1 DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 11TH JYAISHTA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 16700 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
ABDUSSALAMAGED 39 YEARSKADAKKADAN HOUSE, CHELAKUTH KALLARMANGALAM (P.O.) MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-676 553.
BY ADVS.LATHA ANANDM.N.RADHAKRISHNA MENONGOVIND P.K.R.PRAMOTH KUMARRADHAKRISHNA PILLAI BSIDHARTH P.S.
RESPONDENTS:
1THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (BPU)BENAMI PROHIBITION UNIT, POORNIMA BUILDING,3RD FLOOR, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, KOCHI, PIN – 682 036.2THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (INVESTIGATION), AAYKAR BHAVAN, SAKTHAN THAMPURAN NAGAR, THRISSUR, PIN - 680 001.3THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOZHIKODE, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, NORTH BLOCK, NEW ANNEXE BUILDING, MANANCHIRA KOZHIKODE-673 001.4THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (INVESTIGATION), CHUNDAKKAYIL COMPLEX, OFFICE OF DDIR/ADIT (INV.), MANJAKULAM ROAD, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678 014.BY ADV MANU S., ASG OF INDIAADV.SUVIN R MENON, CGCADV.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAMTHIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON01.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
The petitioner has approached this Court challengingproceedings initiated against the petitioner under the provisions ofthe Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988.
2.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that theproceedings are totally without jurisdiction. It is submitted thatsince the proceedings are totally without jurisdiction, it is open tothe petitioner to challenge those proceedings directly before thisCourt under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
3.The learned Assistant Solicitor General of India, whoappears for the 1[st] respondent and the learned Standing Counselappearing for respondents 2 to 4 would however contend that it isopen to the petitioner to raise all contentions including acontention that the proceedings are without jurisdiction before theauthority concerned. It is submitted that if the petitioner files acomposite reply to the notice issued to him and raises ajurisdictional issue, the writ petition can be disposed of directingthe competent authority to decide on the question of jurisdictionbefore proceeding further in the matter.
3
4.The learned Counsel appearing for the 1[st] respondentalso submits that the relief has to be confined to the petitioneralone as the authority may have proceeded further in respect ofother persons who are co-noticees along with the petitioner.
5.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
time granted under Ext.P13 for filing a reply expires on 02.06.2022and and a weeks time may be granted to enable the petitioner tofile a proper reply to Ext.P13.
Taking into account the submissions made by both sides, thiswrit petition will stand disposed of directing that if the petitionerfiles a composite reply to Ext.P13 notice on or before 10.06.2022,the competent authority shall take a decision on any jurisdictionalissue raised by the petitioner in the reply after affording anopportunity to the petitioner to make his submissions. Theauthority shall proceed to decide other issues only after taking adecision on the preliminary issue of jurisdiction. It is also directedthat as the time limit for filing a reply has already expired on31.03.2022, sufficient time may be granted to file a reply.
Sd/-GOPINATH P.JUDGE
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16700/2022
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P7 E
Exhibit P7 FExhibit P8Exhibit P8 AExhibit P8 BExhibit P8 C
Exhibit P8 DExhibit P8 EExhibit P8 E
Exhibit P8 F
Exhibit P9
Exhibit P 9 A
ASSESSMENT YEAR 2019-20.
TRUE COPY OF THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED BY THE PETITIONER WITH RESPECT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2020-21.
TRUE COPY OF THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED BY THE PETITIONER WITH RESPECT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2021-22.
Sd/-GOPINATH P.JUDGE
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16700/2022
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P7 E
Exhibit P7 FExhibit P8Exhibit P8 AExhibit P8 BExhibit P8 C
Exhibit P8 DExhibit P8 EExhibit P8 E
Exhibit P8 F
Exhibit P9
Exhibit P 9 A
ASSESSMENT YEAR 2019-20.
TRUE COPY OF THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED BY THE PETITIONER WITH RESPECT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2020-21.
TRUE COPY OF THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED BY THE PETITIONER WITH RESPECT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2021-22.
TRUE COPY OF THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED BY MOHAMMED SHEREEF WITH RESPECT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015-16 .
TRUE COPY OF THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED BY MOHAMMED SHEREEF WITH RESPECT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2016-17.
TRUE COPY OF THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED BY MOHAMMED SHEREEF WITH RESPECT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2017-18.
TRUE COPY OF THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED BY MOHAMMED SHEREEF WITH RESPECT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2018-19.
TRUE COPY OF THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED BY MOHAMMED SHEREEF WITH RESPECT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2019-20.
TRUE COPY OF THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED BY MOHAMMED SHEREEF WITH RESPECT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2020-21 .
TRUE COPY OF THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED BY MOHAMMED SHEREEF WITH RESPECT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2021-22.
TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 31/03/2022 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER, WITHRESPECT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015-16.
TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 31/03/2022 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER, WITH
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.