Wp(C)/18369/2020 Of Poabs Enterprises Private Limited v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2020 / 27TH BHADRA, 1942 WP(C).No.18369 OF 2020(U) PETITIONER/S: POABS ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITEDKUTTOOR P.O, THIRUVALLA 689 106, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR SRI JOSEPH JACOB. BY ADV. SRI.N.JAMES KOSHY RESPONDENT/S: THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON18.09.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT The petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved by Ext.P11order of the 1st respondent, which cancelled an earlier stay order(Ext.P10) that was passed staying the recovery of disputed amountspending disposal of an appeal preferred by the petitioner. In the WritPetition, it is the case of the petitioner that Ext.P11 order was passed bythe 1st respondent without hearing him, and therefore, the said order isvitiated on account of a non-compliance of the rules of natural justice.Countering the said submission, it is the submission of the learnedSenior counsel for the respondent Income Tax DepartmentSri.Raveendranadha Menon, that inasmuch as the finding in Ext.P11order is that the earlier stay order was passed based on a mis-representation of facts by the representative of the petitioner assessee,the non-compliance with the rules of natural justice cannot be cited as aninstance to vitiate the order passed. Taking note of the rival submission, I find that although there maybe some justification in the 1st respondent passing Ext.P11 orderwithout hearing the petitioner, the appeal in which Ext.P10 and P11orders were passed has been pending since 2018 and, at this distance oftime it may not be necessary to go into the legality of Ext.P11 order or Ext.P10 order as the case may be, I therefore quash Ext.P11 order forthe limited purpose of enabling an expeditious disposal of the Exts.P5and P6 appeals by the 1st respondent appellate authority. The 1strespondent is directed to consider and pass orders on Exts.P5 and P6appeals within an outer time limit of three months from the date ofreceipt of a copy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner. Theinterim stay granted by Ext.P10 order shall continue to remain in forcetill such time as the 1st respondent passes orders as directed in theappeal and communicates the same to the petitioner. The Writ Petition is disposed as above. Sd/- A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE