Wp(C)/3723/2012 Of M/S Meenakshy Enterprises v. The Dy.commissioner Of Income Tax,Circle-1 Kottayam

PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2012/26TH MAGHA 1933 WP(C).No. 3723 of 2012 (M) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- M/S MEENAKSHI ENTERPRISES, Y.M.C.A. ROAD, KOTTAYAM, REPRESENTED BY SHRI MURUKESH THEVAR, MANAGING PARTNER. BY SRI.T.M.SREEDHARAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE. ADVS. SMT.NISHA JOHN, SRI.V.P.NARAYANAN, SMT.BOBY M.SEKHAR. RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE-1, KOTTAYAM. 2THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-IV,AYYAKKAR BHAVAN, I.S. PRESS ROAD,COCHIN-682 018. 3.INDUSIND BANK LTD.,KOTTAYAM BRANCH, REGENCY SQUARE,K.K. ROAD, COLLECTORATE, KOTTAYAM-686 002. 4.AXIS BANK, NO.LX-311, A2 CENTURY TOWERS,NEAR Y.W.C.A., KOTTAYAM-686 001. 5.PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK,P.B. NO.135, SHANGRI-LA PLAZA,T.B. ROAD, KOTTAYAM-686 001. 6.TAMIL NADU MERCHANTILE BANK LTD.,CSI COMMERCIAL COMPLEX, BAKER JUNCTION, KOTTAYAM-686 001. 7.CORPORATION BANK,KOTTAYAM BRANCH, VALAYIL BUILDING,SHASTRI ROAD, KOTTAYAM-686 001. 8.THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE-1, PUBLIC LIBRARY BUILDING,SHASTRY ROAD, KOTTAYAM.CIRCLE-1, PUBLIC LIBRARY BUILDING,SHASTRY ROAD, KOTTAYAM. R1, R2 & R8 BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, INCOME TAX. R7 BY ADV. MR.N. RAJAGOPALAN NAIR, SC. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15-02-2012, ALONG WITH WPC. 3724 OF 2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- EXT.P1COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND DEMAND NOTICE IN FORM NO.7 DATED 31/12/2010.FORM NO.7 DATED 31/12/2010. EXT.P2COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 28/01/2011.2ND RESPONDENT DATED 28/01/2011. EXT.P3COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 21/07/2011 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P4COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 15/07/2011 REJECTING THE REQUEST FOR STAY.REQUEST FOR STAY. EXT.P5COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.AIUPS3690L DATED 06/02/2012 ISSUED BY THE 8TH RESPONDENT.ISSUED BY THE 8TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P6COPY OF THE INSTRUCTION NO.96 DATED 21/08/1969. EXT.P7COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 13/02/2012 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 8TH RESPONDENT.THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 8TH RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) Nos.3723 & 3724/2012 -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 15[th ] day of February, 2012 J U D G M E N T Writ petition(c).No.3723/2012 is filed by the partnership firmrepresented by its Managing Partner and Writ Petition(c).No.3724/2012 is filed by a person who is a partner in the firmand has been assessed in the capacity of legal heir2. . 2. Ext.P1 orders produced in these writ petitions areorders of assessment. According to the petitioner in writ petition(c).No.3723/2012, aggrieved by this order, they have alreadyfiled Ext.P2 appeal and Ext.P3 stay petition which are pendingconsideration of the 2[nd] respondent. In so far as the petitioner inwrit petition(c).No.3724/2012 is concerned she too has filedExt.P2 appeal challenging Ext.P1 order of assessment. 3. While the appeals are pending consideration of the appellate authority garnishee notice under Section 226(3) of theIncome Tax Act(Ext.P5) had been issued demanding payment ofan amount of Rs.26,19,34,991/- from the petitioners. As a result the Bank accounts of the petitioners stand attached which leadthe petitioners to file these writ petitions. 4. I heard the Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners 3. While the appeals are pending consideration of the appellate authority garnishee notice under Section 226(3) of theIncome Tax Act(Ext.P5) had been issued demanding payment ofan amount of Rs.26,19,34,991/- from the petitioners. As a result the Bank accounts of the petitioners stand attached which leadthe petitioners to file these writ petitions. 4. I heard the Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners and the Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents 1 and 5. As at present Ext.P2 appeals filed by the petitioners inthese cases challenging Ext.P1 order of assessment arepending consideration of the 2[nd] respondent. Therefore it will bepremature for this court to deal with the contentions raised bythe learned Sr. Counsel for the petitioners and it is for therespective petitioners to urge these contentions before theappellate authority. 6. Presently petitioners' main grievance is regarding Ext.P5 notice issued under Section 226(3) attaching the bank accounts.As already seen, the demand contained in Ext.P5 is for morethan Rs.26 crores and according to the Standing Counsel for therespondents substantial amounts are available in the Bankaccounts of the petitioners. Petitioners contend that as a resultof the notices above mentioned, the entire bank operations have been stopped and as a consequence there of, their businessoperations have also been stopped. In order to avoid such asituation and also taking note of the amount that is demandedfrom the petitioners and also the pendency of the appeals filedby the petitioners I direct that subject to the petitioners payingRs.5 crores in two equal monthly installments payable on orbefore 28.2.2012 and 15.3.2012, Ext.P5 the notice issued by therespondent under Section 226(3) of the Income Tax Act willstand stayed on the payment of the Ist installment. 7. The appellate authority, the 2[nd] respondent is alsodirected to dispose of Ext.P2 appeals with notice to thepetitioners, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within 8 weeks of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE