Case Law Details
Ponnani Royal Sky Gold LLP Vs ITO (Kerala High Court)
Timely Appeal but No Stay Upload Link – HC Steps In to Ensure Natural Justice- Kerala HC Allows Assessee to File Stay Petition Online Despite Portal Limitations- Technical Glitch No Bar: HC Protects Right to Seek Stay in NFAC Appeals
Petitioner, M/s Ponnani Royal Sky Gold LLP, challenged the coercive steps initiated pursuant to assessment order dated 27.06.2025) & demand notice, pending disposal of its appeal dated 25.07.2025. The grievance was that no separate facility existed for uploading a stay petition along with the appeal, thereby depriving the petitioner of an opportunity to seek stay of recovery.
Revenue contended that the stay petition could still be uploaded via the communication link available for the CIT, & that the petitioner could have availed that route.
The Court observed that since the appeal had been filed within time but stay petition could not be uploaded due to technical limitations, the assessee should not be denied remedy. It directed that the petitioner be permitted to upload the stay petition either through the CIT communication link or other available modes within two weeks. The concerned authority was mandated to ensure facility is provided.
The Court further directed that once the stay petition is filed, the authority must pass a reasoned order within three months after granting hearing. Till then, recovery proceedings were ordered to be kept in abeyance.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF KERALA HIGH COURT
The petitioner is an assessee under the provisions of the Income Tax Act. As against the assessment order passed for the financial year 2021-2022, the petitioner submitted Ext.P5 appeal, before the 2nd respondent. According to the petitioner, the stay petition could not be submitted as there was no separate facility for uploading the stay petition. It was in these circumstances the petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs:
“a Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ or order directing the Respondent No. 2 to pass a final Order in Exhibit P5 Appeal within a reasonable time as may be prescribed by this Hon’ble Court.
b. Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ or order directing the Respondents to provide a link to file a petition to stay the further proceedings of Exhibit P4 Demand Notice.
c. Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ or order forbearing the Respondents from taking any coercive steps against the Petitioner in pursuance to Exhibit P4 Order.
d. Grant such other reliefs that this Hon’ble Court may deem fit to grant in the circumstances of this case.”
The learned Standing Counsel submits that the petitioner can upload the stay petition, through the link kept for the communication to the CIT. In such circumstances, I am of the view that, as the petitioner could not upload the stay petition so far, despite filing the appeal in time, an opportunity has to be provided to the petitioner for the same. In such circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of, permitting the petitioner to upload the stay petition, as suggested by the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents or through other possible modes. The same shall be done within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and the appropriate authority shall ensure that the petitioner is given appropriate facility to do the same. It is further directed that, in case the stay petition in the manner as referred to above is submitted within the time specified above, the same shall be considered and appropriate orders thereon shall be passed in accordance with law, after giving the petitioner an opportunity for being heard, within a period of three months from the date of submission of the said application. Till such time, further proceedings based on Exts.P3 and P4 shall be kept in abeyance.
Author Bio
