Wp(C)/181/2019 Of Hll Biotech Ltd v. Income Tax Officer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU FRIDAY ,THE 04TH DAY OF JANUARY 2019 / 14TH POUSHA, 1940 WP(C).No. 181 of 2019 PETITIONER/S: HLL BIOTECH LTD.HILL BHAVAN, POOJAPPURA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695012, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER. BY ADVS.SRI.V.KRISHNA MENONSMT.J.SURYASMT.P.VIJAYAMMASRI.E.K.MADHAVANSRI.PRINSUN PHILIP RESPONDENT/S: 1INCOME TAX OFFICERWARD 1(1), OFFICE OF THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OFINCOME TAX, RANGE-1, KOWDIYAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695003.WARD 1(1), OFFICE OF THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OFINCOME TAX, RANGE-1, KOWDIYAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695003. 2COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS),AAYAKKAR BHAWAN, KOWDIYAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695003.AAYAKKAR BHAWAN, KOWDIYAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695003. 3PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695003.PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695003. W.P.(C). No. 181 of 2019 4INCOME TAX APPELATE TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH 1ST FLOOR WING C1 AND C2, KENDRIYA BHAVAN, OPP.TO SCEZ, KAKKANAD, KJOCHI-682037, REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR. KJOCHI-682037, REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSISTANT OTHER PRESENT: SRI CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.01.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT The petitioner, an assessee under the Income Tax Act, on therolls of the 1[st] respondent, questioned the Ext.P1 assessment order,before the 2[nd] respondent, who rejected it. Later, the petitionerapproached the 4[th] respondent with second appeal. The petitioner hasalso filed a stay petition in the appeal. Ventilating its grievance thatthe authorities are taking coercive steps before the appellateauthority could consider the stay petition, the petitioner has filed thiswrit petition. 2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the W.P.(C). No. 181 of 2019 learned Government Pleader. 3.I reckon the petitioner has exercised on time hisstatutory remedy of filing an appeal. It appears that he has also fileda stay petition. Procedural fairness demands that the authorities maywait, before taking further steps, until the appellate authority decideson the stay petition. Therefore, I dispose of the writ petition directing therespondent authority to defer coercive steps until the 4[th] respondentconsiders the stay petition. I also hope that the 4[th] respondent willdispose of the stay petition expeditiously. Sd/- DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU JUDGE das APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:EXHIBIT P1TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 26/12/2016. W.P.(C). No. 181 of 2019 EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE OF DEMAND IN FORM-7 UNDER SECTION 156 OF THE INCOMETAX ACT. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 30/1/2018 IN WP(C) NO. 2396/2018. EXHIBIT P4TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 22/1/201822/1/2018 EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 14/6/201814/6/2018 EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 24/9/2018 EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 14/11/2018 IN W.P(C) NO.33679/2018. EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 30/11/201830/11/2018 EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 19/12/2018.