Wp(C)/18245/2006 Of Sabad v. The Income Tax Officer Ii, Kasaragod

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 7TH JUNE 2007 / 17TH JYAISHTA 1929 WP(C).No. 18245 of 2006(V) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ SABAD, AGED 26 YEARS, S/O.MUHAMMED HAJI, RESIDING AT KUKKAMKUYIL, ADHUR, KASARAGOD. BY ADV. SRI.M.SASINDRAN SRI.M.V.BIPIN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER-II, KASARAGOD. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL,GOI(TAXES) SRI.GEORGE K. GEORGE, SC FOR IT THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/06/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C)No. 18245/2006 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1 :COPY OF THE INCOME TAX CLEARANCE CERTIFICATE ISSUED by the 1STRESPONDENT. P2 :COPY OF THE TDS CERTIFICATE DATED 01/08/1998 ISSUED BY THEDIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER. P2(a) :COPY OF THE TDS CERTIFICATED DATED 01/08/1998 ISSUED BY THEDIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER. P2(b) :COPY OF THE TDS CERTIFICATED DATED 01/08/1998 ISSUED BY THEDIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER. P2(c) :COPY OF THE TDS CERTIFICATED DATED 01/08/1998 ISSUED BY THEDIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER. P2(d) :COPY OF THE TDS CERTIFICATED DATED 05/08/1998 ISSUED BY THEDIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER. P3 :COPY OF THE PRESCRIBED FORM DATED 10/8/2003. P4 :COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 16/8/2003. P5 :COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 16/8/2004. P6 :COPY OF THE HEARING NOTE DATED 14/2/2005. P7 :COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 02/01/2006. // TRUE COPY // jg PA TO JUDGE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ----------------------------------- WP(C) No. 18245 of 2006 ------------------------- Dated, this the 7[st] day of June, 2007 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is challenging Ext.P7 proceedings rejectingpetitioner’s application for condonation of delay in filing the returnof income tax. Since Commissioner has power under Sec. 119(2)(b) of the IT Act to condone the delay in filing returns, theCommissioner has to consider the application on the ground raisedby the petitioner and if rejected, the same should be based on validreasons. Since Ext.P7 is only a single sentence order which doesnot indicate the reason for declining application, I set aside thesame with direction to 2[nd] respondent to consider petitioner’sapplication, hear him and pass orders and issue copy of the orderwithin a period of six weeks from the date of production of a copy ofthis judgment. This WP(C) is disposed of as above. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE.)