Wp(C)/25281/2014 Of Elton Technologies v. Principal Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2014/7TH ASWINA, 1936 WP(C).No. 25281 of 2014 (I) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. ELTON TECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD.,(FORMERLY KNOWN AS ELTON WEB SOLUTIONS PVT LTD),3RD FLOOR PUTHURAN PLAZA, KPCC JUNCTION, M.G.ROAD,ERNAKULAM - 682 011,(FORMERLY KNOWN AS ELTON WEB SOLUTIONS PVT LTD),3RD FLOOR PUTHURAN PLAZA, KPCC JUNCTION, M.G.ROAD,ERNAKULAM - 682 011, KERALA REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR MR.B.R.AJIT. 2.MR.B.R.AJIT,MANAGING DIRECTOR, ELTON TECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD.,PUTHURAN PLAZA, THIRD FLOOR, MG ROAD,KPCC JUNCTION, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI - 682 011. BY ADV. SRI.SAIBY JOSE KIDANGOOR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOCHI - 682 018. 2. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOCHI, KERALA - 682 018. 3. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-II, KOCHI, KERALA - 682 018. 4. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1 (1), KOCHI - 682 018. 5. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), KOCHI - 682 018. 6. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2 (1), KOCHI - 682 018. BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29-09-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ON 29-09-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE RVS. WP(C).No. 25281 of 2014 (I) /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ----------------------------------- W.P(C). No. 25281 of 2014 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 29[th] day of September, 2014 J U D G M E N T The first petitioner is a private limited company, having itsmain object to carry on the business as Software Developers, E-Commerce, Internet Service Providers and all informationtechnology related business, while the 2[nd] petitioner is itsManaging Director. In the course of business, they effectedvarious conveyances, which included purchase of plots anddevelopment of the same as 'Silver Sand Island', near Vytilla inErnakulam. Allegedly since the said purchase of land wasultravires the Memorandum of Association of the 1[st] petitionercompany, the petitioners were forced to sell the land. 2.Pursuant to the survey conducted by the 6[th]respondent, various particulars were collected and proceedingswere taken against the petitioners under different provisions ofthe Income Tax Act. Notice was also issued under Section 148 ofthe Income Tax Act on 08.03.2013 in respect of the assessmentyear 2007-08, referring to the 'capital gain' accumulated. 3. In the course of further proceedings, assessment was WP(c). No. 25281 of 2014 finalised against the petitioners as per Ext.P10 series, followed bydemand notices under Section 156 of the Income Tax Act. Beingaggrieved of the assessment, the petitioners moved the thirdrespondent/the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-II, beforewhom the appeals are pending. It is in the meanwhile, that thepetitioners have been served with Ext.P11 notice under Section279(1) of the Act, as to why prosecution proceedings shall not beinitiated under Section 276 CC of the Income Tax Act. It is statedthat the petitioners have submitted a detailed reply. But withoutany regard to the same, proceedings were pursued by therespondent department and it was only on coming across thesummons served upon the petitioners, that they could realise thatprosecution proceedings had already been initiated, whichaccording to the petitioners is without considering their objectionsand hence not correct or sustainable. 4. The learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that, byvirtue of the turn of events and other embarrassingcircumstances, the petitioners have decided to seek forpermission of the respondents for compounding the offence, asprovided under Section 279 (2) of the Act. It was accordingly,that Ext.P14 representation was preferred before the first WP(c). No. 25281 of 2014 respondent/Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax. Theprayer is to cause the same to be considered within the shortestpossible time. 5. Heard the learned Standing Counsel for the respondentsas well. 6. In view of the limited nature of the reliefs sought for, thisCourt does not find it necessary to deal with the merits of thecase. Accordingly, the first respondent is directed to considerExt.P14 representation and pass appropriate orders in accordancewith law, after affording an opportunity of hearing to thepetitioners, at the earliest, at any rate, within one month from thedate of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Further steps by therespondents in connection with prosecution proceedings, if any,may be kept in abeyance till such time. The writ petition isdisposed of. The petitioners shall produce a copy of the judgment alongwith a copy of the writ petition before the first respondent forfurther steps. Sd/- P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE.