Wp(C)/31037/2010 Of C.g.venketeswara Pai v. The Income Tax Officer And Another

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH OCTOBER 2010 / 28TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 31037 of 2010(D) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- C.G.VENKETESWARA PAI NEW DHANYA LOTTERY AGENCY, PARAMARA ROAD, ERNAKULAM,COCHIN-682 018. BY ADV. SRI.TOMSON T.EMMANUEL RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1)RANGE-2,REVENUE BUILDING, I.S.PRESS ROAD, COCHIN-682 018. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, 1ST FLOOR, REVENUE BUILDING, I.S.PRESS ROAD, COCHIN -682 018. BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: VK C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J --------------------------------------- W.P(C) No.31037 of 2010-D ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 20[th] day of October, 2010. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is aggrieved by non-disposal of Ext.P6 application filed before the second respondent underSection 119 (2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Thepetitioner could not file income tax returns with respect ofthe assessment years 2002-03 and 2003-04 within the timestipulated under the statute. According to the petitionerthe delay was caused only because of non receipt ofrequired TDS certificates from the Department of Lotteries,State of Kerala. Ext.P6 petition is filed seeking forcondonation of delay in filing the returns and also seekingdirections to the Assessing Officer to accept the returns. Itis submitted that if the returns are admitted, considerableamount of refund will be due to the petitioner. 2.It is noticed that Ext.P6 application is dated18.3.2010 and it bears acknowledgment evidencing receiptof the same at the office of the second respondent on the It is noticed that Ext.P6 application is dated W.P(C) No.31037 of 2010-D same day. 3.Heard; standing counsel appearing for Government of India (Taxes). It is submitted that Ext.P6application is pending disposal before the secondrespondent. However, receipt of Exts.P2 and P3 returnswas disputed. Learned counsel for the petitioner referringto those exhibits had drawn my attention to the seal affixedthereon from the office of the Assessing Officer, which wasseen scored off. However, even assuming that the returnswere filed as indicated in Exts.P2 and P3, the same couldnot be considered by the authority concerned, unless thedelay in filing of the returns is condoned by the secondrespondent. 4.Under such circumstances, I am of the opinion that the writ petition can be disposed of, on issuingnecessary directions to the second respondent, for an earlydisposal of the matter. 5.The writ petition is disposed of directing thesecond respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P6 W.P(C) No.31037 of 2010-D application filed seeking condonation of delay in filing thereturns with respect to the assessment years 2002-03 and2003-04, after affording an opportunity of hearing to thepetitioner, as early as possible, at any rate within a periodof one month from the date of receipt of a copy of thisjudgment. 6.The assessing officer should deal with Exts.P2 andP3 returns in accordance with law, in case the delay iscondoned by the second respondent. It is submitted by thepetitioner that Exts.P2 and P3 has already been filed beforethe Assessing Officer. If such returns are not available, thepetitioner should be permitted to produce fresh copies ofExts.P2 and P3 in such case. Sd/-JUDGE C.K.ABDUL REHIM // True Copy// ab P.A to Judge