Kerala High Court
Remya Vikraman Nair Rema Devi vs The Central Board Of Direct Taxes on 5 April, 2024
Author: A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar
Bench: A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SYAM KUMAR V.M.
FRIDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 16TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WA NO. 491 OF 2024
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN WP(C) NO.11566 OF 2024
OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT
REMYA VIKRAMAN NAIR REMA DEVI
AGED 43 YEARS
D/O VIKRAMAN NAIR MUDUMBIL PUTHENVEEDU,
KARIKKAKOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695007
BY ADVS.
K.P.PRADEEP
M.J.ANOOPA
T.T.BIJU
T.THASMI
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS
1 THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE,
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NORTH BLOCK , NEW DELHI
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, PIN - 110001
2 ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT NATIONAL
FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI ROOM NO. 401,
2ND FLOOR, E-RAMP,JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM,
DELHI, PIN - 110003
3 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)
NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE (NFAC), DELHI,
ROOM NO. 401, 2ND FLOOR, E-RAMP,JAWAHARLAL NEHRU
STADIUM, DELHI, PIN - 110003
P.R.AJITH KUMAR.
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
05.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
W.A. No.491 of 2024
2
JUDGMENT
Dr. A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar, J.
Against Ext.P1 assessment order for the assessment years
2016-2017 under the Income Tax Act, the appellant had preferred
Ext.P2 appeal and Ext.P3 application for stay pending disposal of the
appeal. When recovery steps were initiated by the respondents
during the pendency of the statutory appeal and stay application, the
appellant approached the writ court through WP(C).No.11566 of
2024, which was disposed by a learned Single Judge by judgment
dated 21.03.2024 relegating the appellant to the alternate remedy of
appeal and directing the Appellate Authority to dispose the stay
application within a period of two months. In the appeal before us,
the appellant impugns the said judgment of the learned Single Judge
solely on the ground that while disposing the Writ Petition, the
learned Single Judge did not grant a stay of recovery proceedings till
such time as the First Appellate Authority considered stay
application/appeal as directed by the learned Single Judge.
2. We have heard Sri.K.P Pradeep, the learned counsel for the
appellant and Sri.P.R AjithKumar, the learned Standing counsel for
the Department.
3. In our view, since the learned Single Judge had relegated
the appellant to the alternate remedy before the statutory authority
it was incumbent upon the learned Judge to protect the appellant
from recovery proceedings pending disposal of the application by the
respondent Appellate Authority. Accordingly, we modify the
impugned judgment of the learned Single Judge to the limited extent
of clarifying that pending disposal of the stay application or appeal
whichever is earlier, by the appellate authority, the recovery
proceedings against the appellant for recovery of the amounts
confirmed against him by Ext.P1 assessment order shall be kept in
abeyance. Save for this limited modification, the rest of the
directions in the impugned judgment are not interfered with.
Sd/-
DR. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
JUDGE
Sd/-
SYAM KUMAR V.M.
JUDGE
smm
