Case Law Details
AN And Sons Inc Vs Assessment Unit,. Income Tax Department (Madras High Court)
The Madras High Court, in the case of AN And Sons Inc Vs Assessment Unit, dismissed a writ petition and facilitated the filing of a statutory appeal with a stay application for interim protection.
The petitioner’s counsel stated that an appeal had been filed before the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), and a stay application had been submitted to the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO). The impugned order in the case dated back to 15.03.2023, and the Writ Petition was instituted on 18.04.2023, a few days beyond the period of limitation.
The counsel for the respondents, considering the smallness of the period, fairly did not object to the maintainability of the appeal. As a result, the Registry of the NFAC, considering all other aspects of the appeal, agreed to entertain it without reference to limitation.
Conclusion: In light of these events, the Madras High Court dismissed the Writ Petition and issued a notice on the stay application, setting a date for personal hearing within two weeks. The court ordered a stay of recovery of the demand until 24.07.2023. This case highlights the court’s willingness to allow for a statutory appeal and stay application, even when a Writ Petition is filed a few days beyond the period of limitation.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Read this order in conjunction with and in continuation of order dated 01.06.2023 that reads as follows:
Ms. Premalatha, learned Junior Standing Counsel accepts notice for the respondents and seeks some time to obtain instructions and file a counter.
2. After some hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner prefers to file a statutory appeal accompanied by a stay application for interim protection.
3. At his request, list on 12.06.2023 at the end of admission list.
2. Today, Mr.Raghav Rajeev Menon, learned counsel for the petitioner states that appeal has been filed before the National Faceless Appeal Centre (in short ‘NFAC’) and the stay application has been filed before the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (in short ‘JAO’)/R2.
3. The impugned order in this case is dated 15.03.2023 and the Writ Petition has been instituted on 18.04.2023. Hence, the institution of the present Writ Petition has been a few days beyond the period of limitation.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents does not, bearing in mind the smallness of the period, fairly raise any objection to the maintainability of the appeal itself. Thus, subject to the appeal maintainable on all other aspects, the same shall be entertained by the Registry of the NFAC without reference to limitation.
5. In light of the same, this Writ Petition stands dismissed. Let notice be issued on the stay application fixing a date for personal hearing within a period of two (2) weeks from date of receipt of a copy of this order, the petitioner heard on the date so fixed and the stay application disposed within a period of four (4) weeks from date of personal hearing, i.e., on or before 24.07.2023. Till then, there shall be a stay of recovery of the demand.
6. It is made clear that if the petitioner does not appear on the date fixed by the JAO/R2, the petitioner loses the benefit of this order and the respondents are at liberty to proceed with the matter in accordance with law, as they think fit. No costs. Connected Miscellaneous Petitions are also dismissed.
