Kerala State Information Technology ... vs Assessment Unit
2024 Latest Caselaw 11888 Ker

Kerala High Court

Kerala State Information Technology ... vs Assessment Unit on 3 May, 2024

Author: Kauser Edappagath

Bench: Kauser Edappagath

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                    PRESENT
               THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
         FRIDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF MAY 2024 / 13TH VAISAKHA, 1946
                           WP(C) NO. 16915 OF 2024
PETITIONER:

              KERALA STATE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY INFRASTRUCTURE
              LIMITED,
              1 ST FLOOR SANKETHIKA, PF LANE, PATTOM PALACE P.O.
              THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA, INDIA
              REPRESENTED BY MANAGING DIRECTOR, DR. SANTHOSH BABU IAS,
              PIN - 695001
              BY ADVS.
              ADITYA UNNIKRISHNAN
              PRIYADARSINI S.
              ANIL D. NAIR (SR.)


RESPONDENTS:

     1        ASSESSMENT UNIT,
              INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT
              CENTRE, NEW DELHI, PIN - 110001
     2        COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS),
              NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, NEW DELHI, PIN - 110001
     3        ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,
              CIRCLE1(1) AYAKKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANATHAPURAM,
              PIN - 695003


              SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, SC



     THIS     WRIT   PETITION   (CIVIL)   HAVING   COME   UP   FOR   ADMISSION   ON
03.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C).No. 16915 of 2024
                                     2


                            JUDGMENT

Dated this the 3rd day of May, 2024

The Income Tax Department has initiated

proceedings against the petitioner for the assessment year

2022-2023. Thereafter, Ext.P1 order along with demand

notice was passed. Challenging Ext.P1, the petitioner

preferred Ext.P2 appeal before the 2nd respondent. The

petitioner has also moved Ext.P3 stay petition. Exts.P2 and

P3 are pending before the 2 nd respondent. The grievance of

the petitioner is that, in the meanwhile, the 3 rd respondent is

initiating steps for recovery of demand as per the demand

notice in Ext.P1 order. The limited prayer of the petitioner is

to give a direction to the 2 nd respondent to consider and

dispose of Ext.P2 appeal and Ext.P3 stay petition.

2. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner

and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, this

writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 2 nd

respondent to consider Ext.P3 stay petition and pass orders

within a period of two months from today. Till then, the

recovery proceedings against the petitioner for recovery of

the amount confirmed against him by Ext.P1 order shall be

kept in abeyance.

Sd/-

DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH SK JUDGE

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16915/2024

PETITIONER EXHIBITS :

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 18.03.2024 ALONG WITH DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL IN FORM 35 DATED 01.04.2024 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT