Kerala High Court
Alkanz Money Exchange Private ... vs Income Tax Officer Ward 1 (1), ... on 18 March, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
FRIDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2022 / 27TH PHALGUNA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 8323 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
ALKANZ MONEY EXCHANGE PRIVATE LIMITED
551, WARD XII KALLIPARAMBIL MEMORIAL
BUILDING, KAIPAMANGALAM P.O MOONNUPEEDIKA,
THRISSUR 680681, KERALA
INDIA, PIN - 680681
BY ADVS.
M.P.SHAMEEM AHAMED
AKHIL PHILIP MANITHOTTIYIL
RESPONDENTS:
1 INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1 (1), THRISSUR
AAYAKAR BHAVAN, INCOME TAX OFFICE,
SHAKTHANTHAMPURAN NAGAR, THRISSUR,
KERALA - 680001, PIN - 680001
2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), THRISSUR
AAYAKAR BHAVAN, INCOME TAX OFFICE,
SHAKTHANTHAMPURAN NAGAR, THRISSUR,
KERALA - 680001, PIN - 680001
3 THE TAX RECOVERY OFFICER, KOZHIKKODE
AAYAKAR BHAVAN, NORTH BLOCK, NEW ANNEXE BUILDING,
MANANCHIRA, KOZHIKODE - 673001, PIN - 673001
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI.JOSE JOSEPH
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
18.03.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 8323 OF 2022
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
-----------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No. 8323 of 2022
----------------------------------------
Dated this the 18th day of March, 2022
JUDGMENT
Aggrieved by Ext.P1 order for the assessment year
2017-18, petitioner preferred an appeal as Ext.P3 before
the 2nd respondent on 20-01-2020. In the meantime, due
to the outbreak of Covid-19 pandemic and the financial
difficulties, petitioner was called upon to submit its written
submissions utilizing the e-proceedings facility on or
before 18/9/2020. Petitioner alleges to have uploaded its
written submission as evidenced by Ext.P7 on 3/10/2020.
The learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out that
despite uploading the written submissions of the petitioner
as directed by the respondents, no orders on the appeal
have been issued for the last more than 18 months.
2. According to the learned counsel, while the appeal
is thus pending consideration, petitioner is served with
Ext.P10 notice demanding payment of amounts imposed
WP(C) NO. 8323 OF 2022
under Ext.P1 order of assessment. The learned counsel
submits that the enforcement of the amount due under
Ext.P1 will create great prejudice to the petitioner,
especially when the appeal is pending consideration.
3. Sri.Jose Joseph, the learned Standing Counsel for
respondents, on the other hand contended that petitioner
had already approached this Court in W.P.(C)No.6141 of
2020, wherein the direction of the income tax officer to
deposit 20% of the amount demanded was found to be
reasonable. In spite of the aforesaid judgment, petitioner
had failed to deposit the said amount and it is in such
circumstances that the respondents were compelled to
initiate proceedings for enforcing the amount due under
Ext.P1.
4. I have considered the rival contentions. After the
judgment in W.P.(C)No.6141 of 2020, severe restrictions
due to Covid-19 pandemic were introduced, including lock-
down. Situation changed thereafter. This fact was noticed
by the Income Tax Department itself, as seen from Ext.P6
notice, wherein they directed the petitioner to submit the
WP(C) NO. 8323 OF 2022
written submissions electronically in the e-proceedings
facility on or before 18/09/2020. Though there was few
days delay, petitioner had uploaded the written
submissions by 3/10/2020. In such an instance, Appellate
Authority was bound to pass final orders in the appeal.
However, it is submitted that till date, final order in the
appeal has not been issued.
5. Taking into consideration the aforesaid
circumstances, I am of the view that, this is a fit case
where the circumstances warrant a direction to dispose of
the appeal itself in a time bound manner. As already more
than 18 months have elapsed since the petitioner was
directed by the respondents to upload the hearing note
which it had in fact done, and even after that, the
respondents failed issue the final order in the appeal,
interests of justice demands that recovery proceedings
ought not to be pursued in the meantime.
6. Treating this as a peculiar circumstance, I am of
the view that the respondent or the Competent Appellate
WP(C) NO. 8323 OF 2022
Authority must be directed to consider and dispose of the
appeal in a time bound manner.
7. Accordingly, I direct the 2nd respondent or the
Competent Appellate Authority to consider and dispose of
Ext.P3 appeal after granting an opportunity of hearing to
the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate,
within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of
this judgment. Till then all coercive proceedings against
the petitioner pursuant to Ext.P10 will be kept in
abeyance.
The writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
JUDGE
AJM
WP(C) NO. 8323 OF 2022
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 8323/2022
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS :
Exhibit 1 COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED
20.12.2019 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR
2017-18.
Exhibit P2 COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED
20.12.2019.
Exhibit P3 COPY OF THE APPEALS FILED IN FORM NO.
35 BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME
TAX (APPEALS).
Exhibit P4 COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 30.01.2020
PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1
(1), THRISSUR.
Exhibit P5 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 02.03.2020
IN WP (C) NO. 6141/2020.
Exhibit P6 COPY OF THE HEARING NOTICE DATED
07.09.2020 ISSUED BY THE COMMISSIONER
OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), THRISSUR.
Exhibit P7 COPY OF THE SUBMISSIONS FILED IN
RESPONSE TO EXHIBIT P6 HEARING NOTICE
ALONG WITH THE SCREENSHOT FROM THE E-
FILING PORTAL.
Exhibit P8 COPY OF THE PETITION FOR STAY AND DELAY
CONDONATION APPLICATION FILED BEFORE
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(APPEALS).
Exhibit P9 COPY OF THE PRINTOUT SHOWING THE
REGISTRATION OF COMPLAINT NO.
CBODT/E/2022/06447.
Exhibit P10 COPY OF THE NOTICE OF DEMAND DATED
03.03.2022 ISSUED BY THE TAX RECOVERY
OFFICER, KOZHIKKODE.
//TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE
