R.J. Williams vs The Assistant Commissioner Of Income ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 33394 Ker

Kerala High Court

R.J. Williams vs The Assistant Commissioner Of Income ... on 18 November, 2024

Author: A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar

Bench: A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar

                                                           2024:KER:86034
                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                    PRESENT

           THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR

                                       &

                 THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K. V. JAYAKUMAR

         MONDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2024 / 27TH KARTHIKA, 1946

                              WA NO. 1108 OF 2024

         AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 09.02.2024 IN WP(C) NO.44175 OF 2023 OF

                            HIGH COURT OF KERALA


APPELLANT/PETITIONER:

            R.J. WILLIAMS, AGED 49 YEARS
            S/O.LATE R.K. JOSE, VELLOTTINGAL HOUSE, ANTONY ROAD, OLLUR,
            THRISSUR, KERALA, PIN - 680306

            BY ADVS.
            N.KRISHNA PRASAD
            P.SHANES METHAR
            PUSHPARAJ.K.P
            GAYATHRI POTI
            ANIL D. NAIR (SR.)(MAH/515/1993)
            ADITYA UNNIKRISHNAN

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

     1      THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,
            CENTRAL CIRCLE, AYAKAR BHAVAN, INCOME TAX OFFICE,
            SAKTHANTHAMPURAN NAGAR, TRICHUR, PIN - 680001
     2      UNION OF INDIA,
            REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY ,DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MINISTRY
            OF FINANCE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI, PIN - 110001
     3      INTERIM BOARD FOR SETTLEMENT,
            IBS-2, LOK NAYAK BHAWAN, KHAN MARKET, NEW DELHI, PIN - 110003

            BY ADVS.
            NAVANEETH.N.NATH
            SUSIE B VARGHESE(K/1300/2019)

         THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18.11.2024, THE

COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.A.1108/2024
                                          2

                                                                  2024:KER:86034

                                   JUDGMENT

Dr. A. K. Jayasankaran Nambiar, J.

In this Writ Appeal, the appellant who was the writ petitioner in

W.P(C).No.44175/2023 impugns the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated

09.02.2024 in the Writ Petition.

2. Briefly stated, the facts are that the appellant, who is a

proprietor of M/s.Multitech Engineering, a partner in M/s.Baba Engineering Works,

M/s.Capital Equipments and Spares, M/s.Screen World, M/s.Siva Pipes and M/s.

Hindustan Fabricators, all firms engaged in supplying machinery parts, spares and

components to a private limited company by name Hailstone Innovations Private

Limited in which the appellant is a Managing Director, had approached the

Settlement Commission for a settlement of its income tax dues for the assessment

years 2014-15 to 2020-21. While approaching the Settlement Commission, the

appellant herein, as also the company Hailstone Innovations Private Limited, had

filed their applications for settlement as a group since there was a dispute regarding

the manner of apportionment, of the income arrived at by the department for the

various assessment years, between the firms of which the appellant was the

proprietor and the company of which he was the Managing Director.

3. It would appear that while the applications for settlement

preferred by the company were rejected by the Interim Board for Settlement citing

non-maintainability, along with the application preferred by the appellant, as

proprietor, for the assessment year 2021, the applications for settlement preferred

by the appellant, as proprietor, for the years 2014-15 to 2019-20 were eventually

taken up by the Interim Board for Settlement and decided against the appellant on

merits. Against the said decision of the Interim Board for Settlement, the appellant

approached this Court through the Writ Petition aforementioned pointing out inter

alia that inasmuch as the rejection of the settlement applications preferred by the

private limited company for all the assessment years mentioned above, had since

been set aside by this Court and remitted to the Interim Board for Settlement for an

adjudication on merits, the ends of justice required that the order on merits passed

by the Board against the appellant also be set aside, and the matter remanded to the

Interim Board for Settlement for deciding the issue afresh along with the settlement

applications preferred by the company.

4. The learned Single Judge who considered the Writ Petition

did not accept the contentions of the appellant and found that inasmuch as there was

2024:KER:86034 a finding by the Interim Board for Settlement that the appellant had not made a true

and complete disclosure of facts as required for the purpose of settlement under the

IT Act, the prayer sought for in the Writ Petition could not be granted. The Writ

Petition was therefore dismissed by the learned Single Judge.

5. Before us, it is the submission of Sri.Anil D. Nair, the learned

Senior Counsel, assisted by Smt.Aditya Unnikrishnan, appearing on behalf of the

appellant that since the settlement applications preferred by the company for the

assessment years in question, are being considered on merits by the Interim Board

for Settlement, and this Court has through a separate judgment dictated today,

dismissed the appeals preferred by the Revenue impugning the judgment of the

Single Judge that directed a consideration on merits by the Interim Board for

Settlement, it would be prudent and in the interests of justice that Ext.P8 order

impugned in the Writ Petition be set aside and the Interim Board for Settlement be

directed to consider the settlement application preferred by the appellant for the

aforesaid years afresh, along with the settlement applications preferred by the

company for the said years.

6. We have also heard Smt.Susie B. Varghese, learned Senior

Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Authority.

7. On a consideration of the rival submissions, we are of the

view that this appeal must succeed. By a separate judgment dictated today, we have

dismissed the Revenue Appeals that impugned the judgment of the learned Single

Judge that remanded the settlement applications that were dismissed on the ground

of maintainability by the Interim Board for Settlement, for fresh consideration on

merits based on the judgment of the Madras High Court in Jain Metal Rolling

Mills v. Union of India [(2023) 156 taxmann.com 513 (Madras)]. The decision of

the Madras High Court in Jain Metals (Supra) has since attained finality consequent

to the dismissal of the SLP preferred by the Revenue against the said judgment

[Union of India & Ors. v. Velammal Chennai Educational Trust [SLP

No.21948/2024 dated 09.07.2024]. The ends of justice would hence require us to

allow this Appeal by setting aside the impugned judgment of the learned Single

Judge, so as to enable the Interim Board for Settlement to have a fresh look on the

application for settlement preferred by the appellant herein for the assessment years

referred above, along with the settlement applications preferred by the company for

the same assessment years, so that the contention of the appellant that the

undisclosed income has been worked out for a group which includes the firms, and

the company is effectively considered by the Interim Board for Settlement while

disposing the matters on merits.

2024:KER:86034 We therefore allow this Appeal by setting aside the impugned judgment

of the learned Single Judge, as also Ext.P8 order that was impugned in the Writ

Petition, and direct the Interim Board for Settlement to reconsider the settlement

application preferred by the appellant herein for the assessment years 2014-15 to

2020-21 along with the settlement applications for the same assessment years

preferred by the company, which are pending adjudication before the Interim Board

for Settlement.

This Writ Appeal is disposed as above.

Sd/-

DR. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE

Sd/-

K. V. JAYAKUMAR JUDGE

Sbna/18.11.24

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

Annexure A1 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF SETTLEMENT APPLICATION FILED BY THE APPELLANT/APPLICANT BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2014-15 TO 2020-21 DATED 22.3.2021 Annexure A2 TRUE COPY OF ANNEXURE Y OF RULE 9 REPORT FILED BY THE 3 RD RESPONDENT Annexure A3 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF VOLUME IV OF THE REPLY TO RULE 9 REPORT FILED BY THE APPELLANT BEFORE THE 3 RD RESPONDENT Annexure A4 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE Interim Board for Settlement DATED 19.12.2023 Annexure A5 TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS IN THE CASE OF M/S. JAIN METAL ROLLING MILLS V. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS IN W.P. NO.13455 OF 2021 DATED 17.11.2023 Annexure A6 TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN THE CASE OF M/S.PANKAJA KASTURI HERBALS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED V. ACIT AND ANR. AND CONNECTED CASES IN W.P.(C) NO.2875 OF 2023 DATED 19.12.2023 Annexure A7 TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF SAR SENAPATI SATAJI SUGAR FACTORY LTD. V ACIT & ORS [2024] 161 TAXMANN.COM 166 (BOM) DATED 2.4.2024 Annexure A8 TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF VETRIVEL INFRASTRUCTURE V DCIT [2024] 164 TAXMANN.COM 123 (GUJ) DATED 14.06.2024 Annexure A9 TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF UOI V VELAMMAL CHENNAI EDUCATIONAL TRUST IN SLP DIARY NO.21948 / 2024 (SC) DATED 9.7.2024