Case Law Details
Manoj K V Vs ITO (Kerala High Court)
The petitioner challenged an assessment order and related penalty orders by filing rectification applications, which were rejected by the authority. Subsequently, the petitioner filed appeals against those rejections along with stay petitions. One of the appeals was filed with a delay, for which a delay condonation petition was submitted. Meanwhile, recovery proceedings were initiated against the petitioner while these applications and appeals were pending.
The court, after hearing both parties, directed the competent authority to consider the delay condonation petition and the accompanying stay petitions within two months from receipt of the judgment, after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. It clarified that the stay application linked to the delayed appeal should be considered only if the delay is condoned. The court further ordered that recovery proceedings arising from the assessment and penalty orders shall remain in abeyance until appropriate orders are passed on the delay condonation and stay petitions.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF KERALA HIGH COURT
The petitioner being aggrieved by Ext.P1 order of assessment and Exts.P2 to P4 orders of penalty, submitted rectification applications. The said applications were rejected by the authority as per Exts.P5 to P8. As against the same, Exts.P9 to P12 appeals were filed. As there was delay in filing Ext.P9 appeal, Ext.P9(a) delay petition was submitted. Exts.P9(b), P10(a), P11(a), P12(a) are the stay petitions submitted along with the aforesaid appeals. The petitioner is aggrieved by the recovery proceedings that are being pursued pending consideration of the aforesaid applications and appeals.
After hearing the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, I am inclined to dispose of this writ petition. Accordingly, it is ordered that, the 3rd respondent shall take up Ext.P9(a) delay petition and Exts.P9(b), P10(a), P11(a), P12(a) stay petitions and appropriate orders thereon shall be passed, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after giving the petitioner an opportunity for being heard. It is clarified that, Ext.P9(b) stay application needs to be considered, only if the appellate authority decides to condone the delay by considering Ext.P9(a) application. Till such orders are passed, the recovery proceedings pursuant to Exts.P1 to P8 shall be kept in abeyance.
Author Bio
