Wp(C)/5808/2022 Of Morning Star Medical Centre, Adimaly v. The Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS TUESDAY, THE 22 DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022 / 3RD PHALGUNA, 1943WP(C) NO. 5808 OF 2022 PETITIONER: MORNING STAR MEDICAL CENTRE, ADIMALYNAZARETH MEDICAL SOCIETY, NAZARETH HILL, ADIMALY, IDUKKI – 685 561, REPRESENTED BY ITS ADMINISTRATOR, REV. SR. LINCY CSN. IDUKKI – 685 561, REPRESENTED BY ITS ADMINISTRATOR, BY ADVS.JOSEPH MARKOSE (SR.)V.ABRAHAM MARKOSABRAHAM JOSEPH MARKOSISAAC THOMAS ALEXANDER JOSEPH MARKOSSHARAD JOSEPH KODANTHARA RESPONDENTS: 1THE ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXOF INCOME TAX INCOME TAX OFFICER, NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NEW DELHI - 110 001.NEW DELHI - 110 001. 2THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTION CIRCLE, COCHIN - 682 018. EXEMPTION CIRCLE, COCHIN - 682 018. 3COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, NEW DELHI - 110001. 4THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, I.S. PRESS ROAD, KOCHI - 682 018. CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, I.S. PRESS ROAD, KOCHI - 682 018. 5THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NEW DELHI - 110 001. NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NEW DELHI - 110 001. 6UNION OF INDIA MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI - 110001, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI - 110001, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. SRI. S. MANU-ASGI-R6 AND ADV.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM -SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON22.02.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J …......….................................. W.P.(C) No.5808 of 2022 ….................................. Dated this the 22[nd] day of February, 2022 JUDGMENT Though the writ petition has been preferredchallenging Ext.P1 order of assessment issued by the1[st] respondent; during the course of arguments, thelearned counsel for the petitioner confined hissubmissions to an opportunity for preferring a staypetition before the appellate authority. 2. Until the assessment year 2018-2019, petitioner wasgranted exemption under Section 11 of the IncomeTax Act, 1961. However, for the assessment year2018-2019, 1[st] respondent denied the exemption andissued an order of assessment as per Ext.P1.Challenging the said order, an appeal has beenpreferred before the National Faceless Appeal Centreas evident from Ext.P2. Since there was no threat of recovery proceedings against the petitioner, at the time when the appeal was filed, petitioner had notsought for a stay.sought for a stay. 3. The grievance of the petitioner now brought to thenotice of this Court is that, during the pendency ofthe appeal, respondents are proposing to initiaterecovery proceedings and the same will cause greatprejudice to the petitioner, unless the proceedingspending before the appellate authority are eithercompleted in a time bound manner or an opportunityfor preferring a stay petition before the appellateauthority is obtained. As far as the latter isconcerned, there is no opportunity for the petitionerto upload the stay petition after the commencementof the National Faceless Appeal Scheme.notice of this Court is that, during the pendency ofthe appeal, respondents are proposing to initiaterecovery proceedings and the same will cause greatprejudice to the petitioner, unless the proceedingspending before the appellate authority are eithercompleted in a time bound manner or an opportunityfor preferring a stay petition before the appellateauthority is obtained. As far as the latter isconcerned, there is no opportunity for the petitionerto upload the stay petition after the commencementof the National Faceless Appeal Scheme. 4. In similar matters this Court had, taking note of the 4. In similar matters this Court had, taking note of the prejudice being caused to the assessees, havedirected the National Faceless Appeal Centre todirected the National Faceless Appeal Centre to provide a link to the assessees to enable them toupload stay petitions in pending appeals. 5. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Standing Counsel for therespondents, this Court is of the opinion thatpetitioner should also be given a similar relief.respondents, this Court is of the opinion thatpetitioner should also be given a similar relief. 6. Accordingly there will be a direction to respondents3 to 5 to provide a link, to the petitioner to uploadan application for stay, within a period of fourweeks from the date of receipt of a copy of thisjudgment. Once a link is provided to the petitioner,the stay application as sought for must be uploadedwithin two weeks thereafter. 3 to 5 to provide a link, to the petitioner to uploadan application for stay, within a period of fourweeks from the date of receipt of a copy of thisjudgment. Once a link is provided to the petitioner,the stay application as sought for must be uploadedwithin two weeks thereafter. 7. If such directions are complied with, the CompetentAppellate Authority shall consider and dispose of thestay application, as expeditiously as possible, at anyrate within a period of six weeks from the date ofuploading of the application for stay. Appellate Authority shall consider and dispose of thestay application, as expeditiously as possible, at anyrate within a period of six weeks from the date ofuploading of the application for stay. WP(C) NO. 5808 OF 2022 5 8. Despite the uploading of stay application, the appellate authority will be at liberty to consider and pass appropriate orders on the appeal itself.Needless to mention that till the application for stayis considered as directed above, all coerciveproceedings initiated pursuant to Ext.P1 shall bekept in abeyance. The writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGEAMV/22/02//2022 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 5808/2022 RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL