Wp(C)/1888/2014 Of Sankaran Chunnambi v. Income Tax Officer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF JANUARY 2014/10TH MAGHA, 1935WP(C).No. 1888 of 2014 (I) --------------------------- PETITIONER:-------------- SANKARAN CHUNNAMBI PAN CCRPS 5686K, CHUNNAMBI HOUSE, RAMANTHALI P.O. PAYYANNUR-KANNUR-670308. BY ADV. DR.K.P.PRADEEPRESPONDENTS:------------ 1. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 4, KANNUR, AAYAKKAR BHAVAN KANNOTHUMCHAL, CHOVVA, KANNUR-670006. 2. CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, 2ND FLOOR, CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, I.S.PRESS ROAD KOCHI-682018. 3. THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110001 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN. BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON30-01-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 1888 of 2014 (I) --------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS ----------------------- EXHIBIT-P1: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 14.08.2008 IN LAR NO.80 OF 2006 PASSED BY THE SUB COURT, PAYYANNUR.OF 2006 PASSED BY THE SUB COURT, PAYYANNUR. EXHIBIT-P2: TRUE COPY OF THE FORM NO.16A NO.B-1041/06 DATED 23.12.2009 ISSUED BY THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA), EZHIMALANAVAL ACADEMY, PAYYANUR.23.12.2009 ISSUED BY THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA), EZHIMALANAVAL ACADEMY, PAYYANUR. EXHIBIT-P3: TRUE COPY OF THE RETURN OF INCOME DATED 20.12.2011 WITH STATEMENT OF COMPUTATION IN PAN CCRPS 5686K SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.STATEMENT OF COMPUTATION IN PAN CCRPS 5686K SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT-P4: TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO.402133-43-2011-12 DATED5.7.2012 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.5.7.2012 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT-P5: TRUE COPY OF THE COVERING LETTER DATED 17.09.2012 SUBMITTED TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER.SUBMITTED TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT-P6: TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 17.1.2013 SUBMITTED BY THEPETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT-P7: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.PAN /W-4/KNR/2013-14DATED 6.6.2013 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.DATED 6.6.2013 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. Rka /true copy/P.S. To Judge P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. .............................................................................. W.P.(C)No.1888 OF 2014 ......................................................................... Dated this the 30[th] January, 2014 J U D G M E N T The petitioner has approached this Court with the followingprayers: “i) to call for the records leading toExt.P3 return of income and issue a writ ofmandamus or any other writs or order ordirections, to the 1[st] respondent to completethe proceedings in Ext.P3 and passappropriate orders in it and to refund theamount of tax remitted in excess by thepetitioner for the assessment year 2010-11,by way of TDS as per Ext.P2, at the earliestor within a time frame fixed by this Hon'bleCourt considering the facts andcircumstances of the case or alternatively;ii) issue a writ of mandamus or any otherwrit or direction or order to the 1[st] respondentto consider and pass appropriate orders inExt.P6 representation filed by the petitioner,at the earliest or within a time frame fixed bythis Hon'ble Court in the facts andcircumstances of the case; iii) Direct the respondents to pay cost of thisproceedings; iv) Grant any other relief, in the interest ofjustice, which this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case. iii) Direct the respondents to pay cost of thisproceedings; iv) Grant any other relief, in the interest ofjustice, which this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that thepetitioner is constrained to approach this Court because of theinordinate delay in disbursing the excess deposit already effectedby the petitioner and that much adverse circumstances are beingexperienced because of the delay, especially since the petitioneris an Octogenarian. 3. The learned Standing Counsel for the respondent/Department submits that the delay was not because of anycallous inaction on the part of the respondents but because ofthe fact that the 'PAN' was not mentioned in the application andit was not available in the System. Hence all the relevantdocuments had to be verified, to have the proceedings finalised.It is also submitted that taking all earnest efforts, an amount ofRs.1,53,278/- due to be disbursed to the petitioner has beenordered to be disbursed to the petitioner with interest ofRs.8431/-(thus a total of R.1,61,710/-). It is also statedthat after completing the procedural formalities, the amount willbe disbursed to the petitioner without further delay. The above submission is recorded and the writ petition is W.P.(C)No.1888 OF 2014 disposed of, directing the first respondent(Income Tax Officer)/competent authority to finalise the proceedings in this regard andto see that the due amount is disbursed to the petitioner at theearliest, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt ofa copy of the judgment. lk P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENONJUDGE