Wp(C)/24847/2023 Of Muhammed Kallat v. Income Tax Officer
High Court
12 Jan 2024 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Wp(C)/24847/2023 Of Muhammed Kallat v. Income Tax Officer
Date of order
12 Jan 2024
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Wp(C)/24847/2023 Of Muhammed Kallat v. Income Tax Officer, the High Court (2024) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH
FRIDAY, THE 12 DAY OF JANUARY 2024 / 22ND POUSHA, 1945WP(C) NO. 24760 OF 2023
PETITIONER:
MUHAMMED KALLAT,KALLAT VILLA, NEAR MCF SCHOOL, BYE PASS ROAD, KALPETTA, WAYANAD, KERALA, PIN – 673121.
BY ADVS. SRI. ANIL D. NAIR SMT. TELMA RAJU SRI. AADITYA NAIR
RESPONDENTS :
1INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, NORTH BLOCK,NEW ANNEXE BUILDING, MANANCHIRA, KOZHIKODE, PIN – 673001.2DISPUTE RESOLUTION PANEL-2, BENGALURU,'A' WING, 4TH FLOOR, KENDRIYA SADAN, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE, PIN – 560034.BY ADVS. SRI. JOSE JOSEPH – SC - INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT SRI. G. KEERTHIVAS SRI. P. G. JAYASHANKAR - SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON12.01.2024, ALONG WITH WP(C).24847/2023, 24857/2023, THE COURT ONTHE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMPRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGHFRIDAY, THE 12 DAY OF JANUARY 2024 / 22ND POUSHA, 1945WP(C) NO. 24847 OF 2023
PETITIONER:
MUHAMMED KALLAT,KALLAT VILLA, NEAR MCF SCHOOL, BYE PASS ROAD, KALPETTA,
WAYANAD, KERALA, PIN – 673121.
BY ADVS. SRI. ANIL D. NAIR SMT. TELMA RAJU SRI. AADITYA NAIR
RESPONDENTS :
1INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, NORTH BLOCK,NEW ANNEXE BUILDING, MANANCHIRA, KOZHIKODE, PIN – 673001.
2DISPUTE RESOLUTION PANEL-2, BENGALURU,'A' WING, 4TH FLOOR, KENDRIYA SADAN, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE, PIN – 560034.
BY ADVS. SRI. JOSE JOSEPH – SC - INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT SRI. G. KEERTHIVAS SRI. P. G. JAYASHANKAR - SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSIONON 12.01.2024, ALONG WITH WP(C).24760/2023 AND CONNECTEDCASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMPRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGHFRIDAY, THE 12 DAY OF JANUARY 2024 / 22ND POUSHA, 1945WP(C) NO. 24857 OF 2023
PETITIONER:
MUHAMMED KALLAT,KALLAT VILLA, NEAR MCF SCHOOL, BYE PASS ROAD, KALPETTA, WAYANAD, KERALA, PIN – 673121.
BY ADVS. SRI. ANIL D. NAIR SMT. TELMA RAJU SRI. AADITYA NAIR
RESPONDENTS :
1INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, NORTH BLOCK,NEW ANNEXE BUILDING, MANANCHIRA, KOZHIKODE, PIN – 673001.
2DISPUTE RESOLUTION PANEL-2, BENGALURU,'A' WING, 4TH FLOOR, KENDRIYA SADAN, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE, PIN – 560034.
BY ADVS. SRI. JOSE JOSEPH – SC - INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT SRI. G. KEERTHIVAS SRI. P. G. JAYASHANKAR - SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSIONON 12.01.2024, ALONG WITH WP(C).24760/2023 AND CONNECTEDCASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
DINESH KUMAR SINGH, J.
--------------------------
W.P.(C) Nos. 24760, 24847 & 24857 of 2023
-------------------------
Dated this the 12[th] day of January, 2024
JUDGMENT
1.Petitioner/assessee is an Non Resident Indian (NRI). In respect ofthe relevant assessment year i.e. 2015-16, the assessee did not filedreturn of his income. The petitioner/assessee along withMr. Aboobacker had constructed a Mall at Mananthavady in the nameand style of M/s. Mall of Kallat. In the said Mall, the petitioner/assesseeowns 75% share. ADIT Investigation wing, Kozhikode conductedverification on 18.04.2019 and information was gathered relating to theinformation made by the petitioner in the said Mall. As per the detailsobtained, total investment in the Mall from 2012 to 2014 was Rs. 3.97crores and the assessee had invested more than Rs. 90,00,000/- in theassessment year 2015-16.
-------------------------
Dated this the 12[th] day of January, 2024
JUDGMENT
1.Petitioner/assessee is an Non Resident Indian (NRI). In respect ofthe relevant assessment year i.e. 2015-16, the assessee did not filedreturn of his income. The petitioner/assessee along withMr. Aboobacker had constructed a Mall at Mananthavady in the nameand style of M/s. Mall of Kallat. In the said Mall, the petitioner/assesseeowns 75% share. ADIT Investigation wing, Kozhikode conductedverification on 18.04.2019 and information was gathered relating to theinformation made by the petitioner in the said Mall. As per the detailsobtained, total investment in the Mall from 2012 to 2014 was Rs. 3.97crores and the assessee had invested more than Rs. 90,00,000/- in theassessment year 2015-16.
2.The petitioner being an NRI and he is an “eligible assessee” underSub-Section 15 (b) (ii) of Section 144 C of the Income Tax Act, 1961(hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for short). The petitioner wasissued with draft assessment order giving an opportunity to fileobjection to the draft assessment order. The petitioner admittedly didnot file any objection to the draft assessment order within thirty days
and sought time for filing the objection to the draft assessment order.There is no provision under Sub-Section (3) and (4) of Section 143 forextending the thirty days time for filing the objection to the draftassessment order. Therefore, the request of the petitioner is notentertained and impugned assessment orders in Exhibit P-8 have beenpassed.
3.I do not find any ground to interfere with the impugnedassessment orders as there is no provision in the Income Tax Act toextend the limitation of thirty days for filing objection against the draftassessment order. As the petitioner failed to file objection to the draftassessment order within period of thirty days, the Disputes ResolutionPanel and the assessing authority have proceeded in the matter inaccordance with the law and there is no incursion of law or violation ofthe principles of natural justice which requires this Court to interferewith the assessment orders impugned in these writ petitions.Therefore, these writ petitions are hereby dismissed. However, thepetitioner may take recourse to any statutory appeal if he so advised.
With the aforesaid directions, the present writ petitions areallowed.
Sd/-DINESH KUMAR SINGH
JUDGE
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 24760/2023
PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1TRUE COPY OF DRAFT ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THEASSESSMENT YEAR 2015-16 DATED 30.5.2023 ISSUEDBY THE 1ST RESPONDENTASSESSMENT YEAR 2015-16 DATED 30.5.2023 ISSUEDBY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P2TRUE COPY OF THE PASSPORT OF THE PETITIONEREXHIBIT P3TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 30.06.2023ADDRESSED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT BY THEPETITIONEREXHIBIT P3TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 30.06.2023ADDRESSED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT BY THEPETITIONER
EXHIBIT P4TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY FILED IN FORM 34BC BYTHE PETITIONERTHE PETITIONER
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 24847/2023
PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1TRUE COPY OF DRAFT ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THEASSESSMENT YEAR 2016-17 DATED 30.5.2023ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENTASSESSMENT YEAR 2016-17 DATED 30.5.2023ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P2TRUE COPY OF THE PASSPORT OF THE PETITIONEREXHIBIT P3TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 30.06.2023ADDRESSED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT BY THEPETITIONEREXHIBIT P3TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 30.06.2023ADDRESSED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT BY THEPETITIONER
EXHIBIT P4TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY FILED IN FORM 34BC BYTHE PETITIONERTHE PETITIONER
EXHIBIT P4TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY FILED IN FORM 34BC BYTHE PETITIONERTHE PETITIONER
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 24847/2023
PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1TRUE COPY OF DRAFT ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THEASSESSMENT YEAR 2016-17 DATED 30.5.2023ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENTASSESSMENT YEAR 2016-17 DATED 30.5.2023ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P2TRUE COPY OF THE PASSPORT OF THE PETITIONEREXHIBIT P3TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 30.06.2023ADDRESSED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT BY THEPETITIONEREXHIBIT P3TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 30.06.2023ADDRESSED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT BY THEPETITIONER
EXHIBIT P4TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY FILED IN FORM 34BC BYTHE PETITIONERTHE PETITIONER
EXHIBIT P5TRUE COPY OF THE E-MAIL ADDRESSED TO THEPETITIONER BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT ON 12.7.2023PETITIONER BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT ON 12.7.2023EXHIBIT P6TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 19.07.2023ADDRESSED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT BY THEPETITIONERADDRESSED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT BY THEPETITIONEREXHIBIT P7TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 20.07.2023ADDRESSED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 2NDRESPONDENTADDRESSED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 2NDRESPONDENTEXHIBIT P8TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED19.07.2023 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT19.07.2023 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 24857/2023
PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS
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.