Basheer P.N.O vs The ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 5933 Ker

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
                 THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
     WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF MAY 2023 / 3RD JYAISHTA, 1945
                      WP(C) NO. 16411 OF 2023
PETITIONER:

          BASHEER P.N.O.
          AGED 55 YEARS
          S/O. MOHAMMED ALI, PROPRIETOR, M/S. P.K.L TRADERS,
          ERNAD TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 673637

          BY ADVS.
          HARISANKAR V. MENON
          MEERA V.MENON
          R.SREEJITH
          K.KRISHNA
          PARVATHY MENON



RESPONDENT:

          THE ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASST. COMMISSIONER OF
          INCOME TAX/INCOME TAX OFFICER
          NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI, PIN - 110001

          SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
24.05.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 16411 OF 2023
                                 2




                            C.S.DIAS, J.
            --------------------------------------------
                  W.P.(C).No.16411 of 2023
                --------------------------------------------
            Dated this the 24th day of May, 2023

                           JUDGMENT

The writ petition is filed to direct the respondent to

grant the petitioner two months time from 15.05.2023 to

file his objection to Ext.P1 notice.

2. The petitioner's case is that, assessment steps

have been taken against the petitioner by the

respondent, alleging variation to the returned income.

The respondent has issued Ext.P1 notice on 15.05.2023,

directing the petitioner to show cause within 48 hours,

why action should not be taken against him. Even though

the petitioner was proposing to file a reply to Ext.P1

seeking enlargement of time, the web portal of the

respondent was closed. The time period fixed by the

respondent in Ext.P1 is unreasonable, arbitrary and WP(C) NO. 16411 OF 2023

unjustifiable. Hence, the writ petition.

3. Heard: Sri. Harisankar V.Menon, the learned

counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.Jose Joseph,

the learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

4. Having considered the pleadings and materials

on record and taking into account the submissions made

across the bar, I am of the view that the 48 hours time

period fixed by the respondent in Ext.P1 is too short a

period for the petitioner to submit a reply with adequate

materials to substantiate his defence. Consequently, I am

of the view that the petitioner has to be granted at least

one month's time from 16.05.2023 to submit his reply

with materials.

Resultantly, in exercise of the powers of this Court

under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, I dispose of

the writ petition as follows:-

(i) The respondent shall accept the reply if any filed

by the petitioner with supporting materials, if filed within

one month from 16.05.2023.

WP(C) NO. 16411 OF 2023

(ii) The respondent shall consider and finalise Ext.P1

show cause notice after adverting to the reply filed by the

petitioner in accordance with law.

Sd/-

C.S.DIAS JUDGE

LEK WP(C) NO. 16411 OF 2023

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16411/2023

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 COPY OF SHOW CAUSE NOTICE ISUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2016-17 DTD. 15-05-2023

Exhibit P2 COPY OF JUDGMENT IN WPC NO. 11525/2022 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT DTD. 01-03-2023