Wp(C)/5527/2018 Of Kerala Livestock Development Board Ltd v. The Asssistant Commissioner Of Income Tax

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR MONDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2018 / 30TH MAGHA, 1939 WP(C).No. 5527 of 2018 ------------------------- PETITIONER(S)-------------- KERALA LIVESTOCK DEVELOPMENT BOARD LTD. GOKULAM, PATTOM, TRIVANDRUM-695004, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. BY ADVS.SMT.SUMATHY DANDAPANI (SR.) SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI RESPONDENT(S): -------------- 1. THE ASSSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1(1), KOWDIAR, TRIVANDRUM-695003 2. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, OFFICE OF THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOWDIAR, TRIVANDRUM.695003 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) KOWDIAR, TRIVANDRUM. 695003 KOWDIAR, TRIVANDRUM. 695003 R BY SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT,SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19-02-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: --------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS----------------------- EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 24.3.2016EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 24.3.2016 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR A SUM OF RS.17,36,70,360/-EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) VIDE REFERENCE NO.FC1404/AY 2013-14 DTD.14.4.2016EXHIBIT P3(A) TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED NIL.EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED NIL.EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER BEARING NO.CIR-1(1)TVM/STAY/16-17 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DATED 5.10.2016EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FOR STAY FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 02.03.2017EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DTD.7.4.2017EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER BEARING NO.C.NO.701/J/CIT/STAY/86/2016-17 DATED 24.1.2018 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER BEARING NO.AAACK9533D/CIR-1(1)/TVM/17-18 DATED 12.02.2018 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER IN ITA NOS.474,484, AND 485/COCH/2016 DATED 1.2.2018 RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS ----------------------- hmh :NIL // True copy //Sd/- PA to Judge P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J. ......................................................W.P.(C).No.5527 of 2018 ......................................................Dated this the 19[th] day of February, 2018 JUDGMENT Petitioner is an assessee under the Income Tax Act,1961(the Act) on the files of the first respondent. The selfassessment made by the petitioner for the year 2013-14 hasbeen revised in terms of Section 143(3) of the Act as perExt.P1 order. Petitioner challenged Ext.P1 order in Ext.P3appeal before the third respondent. Ext.P3(a) is theapplication for stay filed by the petitioner before the thirdrespondent in the said appeal. When the matter was pendingbefore the third respondent, proceedings have been initiatedby the first respondent for realisation of the amount coveredby Ext.P1 order. The petitioner then preferred an applicationfor stay before the first respondent, invoking the power underSection 220(6) of the Act. In terms of Ext.P5 order, the firstrespondent granted the stay sought for by the petitioner oncondition that the petitioner shall pay 15% of the amountcovered by Ext.P1 order. Aggrieved by Ext.P5, the petitioner W.P.(C).No.5527 of 2018 : 2 : W.P.(C).No.5527 of 2018 : 2 : filed a review petition before the second respondent and interms of Ext.P8 order, the second respondent directed thepetitioner to pay 20% of the amount covered by Ext.P1 order.The petitioner is aggrieved by Exts.P5 and P8 orders.According to the petitioner, in the light of Ext.P10 order passedby the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in respect of theassessment of the petitioner for some of the previous years,the petitioner is entitled to an absolute stay in the matter. Thepetitioner, therefore, seeks appropriate directions in thisregard, in this writ petition.2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner asalso the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 3. In so far as the stay petition preferred by thepetitioner in Ext.P3 appeal is pending consideration, I deem itappropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the thirdrespondent to take a decision on Ext.P3(a) stay petitionpreferred by the petitioner in Ext.P3 appeal. This shall be donewithin one month from the date of receipt of a copy of thisjudgment. Needless to say that when a decision is taken asdirected above, the third respondent shall certainly advert toExt.P10 order passed by the Tribunal. Needless also to say that W.P.(C).No.5527 of 2018 : 3 : until orders are passed as directed above, further proceedings for realisation of the amounts covered by Ext.P1 order shall bedeferred. Sd/-P.B. SURESH KUMAR,JUDGE hmh