Wp(C)/21162/2022 Of Ramachandran v. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMPRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. THURSDAY, THE 25 DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 3RD BHADRA, 1944WP(C) NO. 21162 OF 2022 PETITIONER: RAMACHANDRAN,AGED 49 YEARS,54, T.C.37/150, PADMA NAGAR, EAST FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 023, REPRESENTED BY MR. RAMANCHANDRAN BALACHANDRAN, MANAGING PARTNER. BY ADVS.T.M.SREEDHARAN (SR.)V.P.NARAYANAN RESPONDENTS: 1THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 003.2THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS),NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT MINISTRY OF FINANCE, JAWAHARLAL STADIUM, NEW DELHI - 110 001. BY SRI. JOSE JOSEPH (SC) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON25.08.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT The petitioner has approached this Court being aggrievedby proceedings initiated for recovery of amount of penaltyassessed in terms of Ext.P4 order at a time when statutoryappeal is pending against the order imposing penalty. It is thecontention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that Ext.P4is an ex parte order and the penalty was imposed without evenconsidering the contentions of the petitioner. 2.The learned Standing Counsel for the respondentDepartment points out that a search was conducted in thepremises of the petitioner. It is submitted that following thesearch, huge undisclosed income was detected and thepetitioner voluntarily filed the return of income accepting thatthere was undisclosed income and discharged the liability fortax in respect of the amount of undisclosed income. It issubmitted that penalty under Section 271AAB of the Income TaxAct is almost automatic and no fault can be found with Ext.P4order. The learned counsel for the petitioner in reply states thatthe penalty under Section 271AAB of the Income Tax Act is notautomatic and considering the facts and circumstances of thecase, it is always open to the authorities to drop the proceedings for penalty. 3.Having regard to the facts and circumstances of thecase, considering the contentions raised by either side and alsoconsidering the fact that an appeal against Ext.P4 orderimposing penalty is pending before the 2[nd] respondent, this writpetition is disposed of directing the 2[nd] respondent to considerand pass orders on the appeal filed by the petitioner againstExt.P4 order. Any proceedings for recovery of amounts dueunder Ext.P4 shall be kept in abeyance on condition that thepetitioner remits the sum equivalent to 10% of the amount ofpenalty in four monthly instalments commencing from16.09.2022. The first instalment shall be paid on or before16.09.2022 and subsequent instalments shall be paid on orbefore the 16[th] day of the succeeding months. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/-GOPINATH P.JUDGE APPENDIX OF WP(C) 21162/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED29.9.2021 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENTExhibit P2TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 23.3.2022 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 23.3.2022FOR INITIATING PENALTY PROCEEDINGS FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2019-20. Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 23.3.2022 ALONG WITH ACKNOWLEDGMENT BY THE DEPARTMENT. Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE PENALTY ORDER DATED 27.3.2022 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.