Wp(C)/6756/2024 Of Plasseri Pulikkal Muhammed Ali v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Kozhikode

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMPRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH WEDNESDAY, THE 21 DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 2ND PHALGUNA, 1945WP(C) NO. 6756 OF 2024 PETITIONER: PLASSERI PULIKKAL MUHAMMED ALI,AGED 63 YEARSS/O MUHAMMED (LATE), RESIDING AT A11A, BENZEER MANZIL, KUTTOOR POST, AR NAGAR, MALAPPURAM, PIN - 676305BY ADVS.M.P.SHAMEEM AHAMEDAKHIL PHILIP MANITHOTTIYILDANIYA RASHEED PALLIYALIL S/O MUHAMMED (LATE), RESIDING AT A11A, BENZEER MANZIL, RESPONDENTS: 1THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, KOZHIKODE,AAYAKAR BHAVAN, NORTH BLOCK, NEW ANNEXE BUILDING, MANANCHIRA, KOZHIKODE, KERALA, PIN - 673001 2THE PRINCIPLE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (INV) KOCHI,ARYA BHANGY PINNACLE, SA ROAD, ELAMKULAM, KOCHI, PIN - 682020 SUSIE B. VARGHESE-SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT Dated this the 21[st] day of February, 2024 This is the 2[nd] writ petition by the petitioner before thisCourt. 2.The 1[st] writ petition, W.P(C.) No.7829/2023 wasfiled before this Court with following prayers: “i)To call for the records leading to the issuance ofExt.P1, Ext.P2, Ext.P3 and Ext.P4 notices and to issue a writof mandamus or such other writ or direction to the 1[st]Respondent to defer the assessment proceedings initiatedpursuant to Ext.P1 and Ext.P3 notices until such time all thedocuments seized from the petitioners business premises arereturned to petitioner and for a further period of 4 monthsfrom the date of such return. ii)To issue a writ of mandamus or such other writ ordirection to the 2[nd] Respondent to complete the investigationsagainst the petitioner and his related entities and release allthe seized records in a time bound manner.” 3.This Court considering the grievance of the petitioner disposed of the said writ petition with followingdirections: “Considering the said stand and the submissions of thelearned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learnedSenior Standing Counsel for the Revenue, the present writpetition is disposed of with direction to the petitioner to move an application before the Department for supply of copies ofrelevant documents within a period of ten days from today. Ifsuch an application is moved, the Department should supplycopies of the relevant documents and pen-drives to thepetitioner within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date ofreceipt of such application, to enable the petitioner to fileproper reply to Ext.P4 notice for undertaking furtherproceedings. After the petitioner is given copies of therelevant documents on charge basis as above, the petitionershould file his reply to Ext.P4 notice within a period of fourweeks from the date of receipt of copies of the relevantdocuments from the Department. Further proceedings inrespect of Ext.P4 notice should commence after four weeksfrom the date of supply of copies of relevant documents to thepetitioner. If the petitioner fails to file an application forsupply of copies of relevant documents as above, or if thedocuments are provided as above and the petitioner fails tofile his reply to Ext.P4 notice within four weeks from the dateof receipt of copies of relevant documents, the Departmentshould proceed with the notice in Ext.P4, in accordance withlaw. It is made clear that if the petitioner files his reply withina period of four weeks of receipt of copies of relevantdocuments, final assessment order passed by the Departmentin the proceedings shall not be challenged by the petitioneron the ground of limitation. To enable the parties toundertake the aforesaid exercises, further proceedings inpursuance to Ext.P4 notice shall be kept in abeyance. Interlocutory application, if any, in the present writpetition stands dismissed.” Interlocutory application, if any, in the present writpetition stands dismissed.” 4.The petitioner is an assessee under theprovisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafterreferred to as ‘IT Act 1961’) is engaged in the businessof manufacturing wholesale and retail of gold jewelleryin the brand name ‘Dubai Gold’. The petitioner hascreated several entities and entities includingproprietor firms, partnership firms, limited liabilitypartnership, private limited companies etc., more than12 in numbers. 5.A search and seizure operation wasconducted at the business and residential premises ofthe petitioner. Several incriminating documents,materials and hard disc of computers etc., were seizedfrom the business and residential premises of thepetitioner and proceedings have been undertaken tocomplete the assessment under Section 153C of theI.T Act, 1961 for the assessment years 2015-2016 to2020-2021. The petitioner approached this Court thatdespite the application having been made by thepetitioner, the relevant documents were not suppliedto him and in absence of the documents, the petitioner was unable to give proper reply to the notices issued tohim. Having considered the grievance and the stand ofthe revenue, this Court disposed of the said writpetition with directions as mentioned above. 6.Now the petitioner has approached thisCourt in the present writ petition with the followingprayer: “To issue a writ of mandamus or such other writ ordirection to the Respondent to defer the assessment U/s153 C for the AY2011-2023 in the case of the petitionerunder Ext.P1, P3 and P12 notices till the assessments inthe case of the petitioner and the Dubai Gold Group ofCompanies u/s 147 are completed for the AY 2011-2023.” 7.The grievance/issue which is raised in thepresent writ petition was very much available to thepetitioner. The petitioner did not make any prayer inthe earlier writ petition in respect of thegrievance/issue raised here, if any, as he stated in thepresent writ petition. A litigant cannot be allowed tocome and file separate proceedings for each and everygrievance/issue as and when he feels that same issue isthere which was not raised in the earlier concludedproceedings between the same parties. This writ AP 6 petitionisbarredbytheprincipleofres-judicata/constructive res-judicata. The sum andsubstance of the writ petition is the proceedings inpursuance to the search and seizure operationconducted on the business and residential premises ofthe petitioner and the very same issue was before thisCourt in earlier writ petition. Considering the aforesaid facts, I find this writpetition is nothing but a gross abuse of process of thecourt. The petitioner is adopting every trick to stall theearly completion of the assessment proceedings. ThisCourt cannot be a party to such a trick of a litigant.Thus, the present writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- DINESH KUMAR SINGH JUDGE PETITIONER EXHIBITS AP 6 petitionisbarredbytheprincipleofres-judicata/constructive res-judicata. The sum andsubstance of the writ petition is the proceedings inpursuance to the search and seizure operationconducted on the business and residential premises ofthe petitioner and the very same issue was before thisCourt in earlier writ petition. Considering the aforesaid facts, I find this writpetition is nothing but a gross abuse of process of thecourt. The petitioner is adopting every trick to stall theearly completion of the assessment proceedings. ThisCourt cannot be a party to such a trick of a litigant.Thus, the present writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- DINESH KUMAR SINGH JUDGE PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 02.06.2022 ISSUED UNDER SECTION 153 C FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR STARTING FROM 2015-16 TO 2020-21Exhibit P2A COPY OF THE PRE-ASSESSMENT NOTICE DATED 29.08.2022 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENTExhibit P3A COPY OF THE NOTICES DATED 29.08.2022 ISSUED UNDER SEC153 C OF THE INCOME TAX ACT FOR THE AYS 2011-12 A.Y 2012-13 AND A.Y 2013-14Exhibit P4A COY OF THE NOTICE DATED 17.02.2023 BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 142 (1)Exhibit P5COPY OF THE PANCHANAMA DATED 23.02.2023 FROMTHE DOCUMENTS SEIZED FROM THE PETITIONER'S CORPORATE OFFICE AT, M/S DUBAI GOLD & DIAMONDSExhibit P6COPY OF THE PANCHANAMA DATED 24.02.2023 FOR THE DOCUMENTS SEIZED FROM THE PETITIONER'S FIRM AT 'FIRDOUS COMPLEX KUNNUMPURAMExhibit P7COPY OF THE PANCHANAMA DATED 22.02.2023 FOR THE DOCUMENTS SEIZED FROM FIRDOUS GOLD PERINTHALMANNA LLPExhibit P8COPY OF THE PANCHANAMA DATED 23.02.2023 FOR THE DOCUMENTS SEIZED FROM FIRDOUS GOLD CHEMMAD PRIVATE LIMITEDExhibit P9COPY OF THE PANCHANAMA DATED 24.02.2023 FOR THE DOCUMENTS SEIZED FROM FIRDOUS GOLD RAMANATTUKARA LLPExhibit P10COPY OF THE PANCHANAMA DATED 24.02.2023 FOR THE DOCUMENTS SEIZED FROM PPM KONDOTTIExhibit P11A COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C).NO.7829/2023Exhibit P12COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 11.01.2024 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENTExhibit P13A COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 25.01.2024Exhibit P14A COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 27.01.2024Exhibit P15A COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 16.08.2023Exhibit P16A COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 02.06.2023 ISSUEDBY THE PETITIONERExhibit P17COPY OF THE SUMMONS DATED 16.08.2023Exhibit P18A COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 01.02.2024 ISSUEDBY THE 1ST RESPONDENT