Wp(C)/1991/2022 Of Maliakal Varkey Thomas v. Principal Chief Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Nfac), Delhi
High Court
20 Jan 2022 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Wp(C)/1991/2022 Of Maliakal Varkey Thomas v. Principal Chief Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Nfac), Delhi
Date of order
20 Jan 2022
Assessment year(s)
2014-2015, 2014-15
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Wp(C)/1991/2022 Of Maliakal Varkey Thomas v. Principal Chief Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Nfac), Delhi, the High Court (2022) decided the matter.
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 SHAJI P.CHALY
THURSDAY, THE 20 DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 30TH POUSHA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 1991 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
MALIAKAL VARKEY THOMASAGED 65 YEARSFLAT NO 15B, M TOWER, MB HIGHTS,THAIKKATTUKARA PO, COMPANIPADI,KOCHI,PIN - 682106
BY ADVS.NIDHI JACOBSUKUMAR NAINAN OOMMENSHERRY SAMUEL OOMMENNITISH SATHESH SHENOY
RESPONDENTS:
1PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (NFAC), DELHI, CR BUILDING, IP ESTATE, NEW DELHI, PIN - 110002(NFAC), DELHI, CR BUILDING, IP ESTATE, NEW DELHI, PIN - 110002
2THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS UNIT)-2
POORNIMA BUILDINGS, MANORAMA JUNCTIONPANAMPILLY NAGAR, PIN - 682036PANAMPILLY NAGAR, PIN - 682036
3THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAXNON-CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), CR BUILDING, 3RD FLOOR, IS PRESS ROADKOCHI, PIN - 682018
44. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAXCORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1)IS PRESS ROAD, KOCHI, PIN - 682018CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1)IS PRESS ROAD, KOCHI, PIN - 682018
SRI.JOSE JOSEPH,STANDING COUNSEL
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FORADMISSION ON 20.01.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAYDELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
J U D G M E N T
Dated this the 20[th] day of January, 2022
This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking the followingreliefs:
"i. To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriatewrit, order or direction, to the 3[rd] and 4[th] Respondents, tokeep in abeyance coercive proceedings pursuant to ExhibitP1 assessment order and Exhibit P6 communique, pendingdisposal of the Exhibits P5 stay application by the 1[st]Respondent;
ii. To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriatewrit, order or direction to the 1[st] Respondent to considerand pass appropriate orders on Exhibit P5 stay applicationwithin a defined time-frame, after granting the Petitioneran opportunity of personal hearing."
2. The relief sought for by the petitioner is against Exhibit P6letter issued by the Income Tax Department demanding payment ofdues as per Exhibit P1 order of assessment, while Exhibit P2 appeal andExhibit P5stay application is pending consideration before the statutoryauthority for the assessment year 2014-2015.
3. Even though various contentions are raised, the sole reliefsought for by learned counsel for petitioner is consideration of staypetition within a time frame and an order restraining the Departmentfrom proceeding for recovery of the amount, for the assessment year2014-2015.
Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner Sri. Sherry
Samuel Oommen and learned Standing Counsel for Income TaxDepartment Sri.Jose Joseph, this writ petition is disposed of directingthe competent authority to dispose of Exhibit P5 stay petition, inaccordance with law, within a month from the date of receipt of a copyof this judgment.
I also make it clear that pending adjudication of the stay petition,
recovery proceedings, if any, consequent to Exhibit P6 demand lettershall be kept in abeyance, till such time a decision is taken by thecompetent authority, as directed.
Sd/- Judge
Shaji P. Chaly,
sou.
W.P(C).1991/2022
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 1991/2022
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 21.12.2016 PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR AY 2014-15DATED 21.12.2016 PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR AY 2014-15
EXHIBIT P2TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER ON 31.01.2017PETITIONER ON 31.01.2017
EXHIBIT P3TRUE COPY OF THE OFFICE ORDER NO 3 DATED 29.12.2021 SETTING UP THE NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE UNDER THE NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL SCHEME, 2021DATED 29.12.2021 SETTING UP THE NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE UNDER THE NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL SCHEME, 2021
EXHIBIT P4TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SEEKING STAY OF DEMAND DATED 13.01.2022 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENTSTAY OF DEMAND DATED 13.01.2022 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 1991/2022
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 21.12.2016 PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR AY 2014-15DATED 21.12.2016 PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR AY 2014-15
EXHIBIT P2TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER ON 31.01.2017PETITIONER ON 31.01.2017
EXHIBIT P3TRUE COPY OF THE OFFICE ORDER NO 3 DATED 29.12.2021 SETTING UP THE NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE UNDER THE NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL SCHEME, 2021DATED 29.12.2021 SETTING UP THE NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE UNDER THE NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL SCHEME, 2021
EXHIBIT P4TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SEEKING STAY OF DEMAND DATED 13.01.2022 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENTSTAY OF DEMAND DATED 13.01.2022 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P5TRUE COPY OF THE STAY APPLICATION SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT VIDE E-MAIL DATED 13.01.2022SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT VIDE E-MAIL DATED 13.01.2022
EXHIBIT P6TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 20.12.2021 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT WITH RESPECT TO PENDING DEMANDS20.12.2021 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT WITH RESPECT TO PENDING DEMANDS
EXHIBIT P7TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 24.12.2021PETITIONER DATED 24.12.2021
EXHIBIT P8TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 01.03.2016 OF THIS HON’BLE COURT IN WPC 7885 OF 201601.03.2016 OF THIS HON’BLE COURT IN WPC 7885 OF 2016
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.