Advertisement
Advertisement
Skip to content
Follow Us on
Advertisement
TOP STORIES
Income Tax

Tax Recovery Stayed Pending Decision on Section 154 Rectification Plea

Case Law Details

TaxGuru Citation
2025 taxguru.in 10653
Case Name
Satheesan Damodaran Vs Central Board of Direct Taxes (Kerala High Court)
Date of Judgement/Order
Only available for paid members
Advertisement

Satheesan Damodaran Vs Central Board of Direct Taxes (Kerala High Court)

The petitioner, a 65-year-old proprietor of Darsana Traders, challenged the NFAC’s order dismissing his appeal for AY 2015-16 on the ground of a 704-day delay. The delay was explained through medical certificates citing ill health, but the NFAC refused condonation &  dismissed the appeal without examining its merits. The petitioner then filed a rectification petition under section 154 seeking reconsideration of the condonation &  appeal dismissal.

The High Court observed that since the rectification petition was already pending, it was appropriate for the NFAC to dispose of it before pursuing any coercive recovery measures. Court held that ignoring a pending rectification plea while continuing recovery would cause undue hardship &  violate fairness in quasi-judicial proceedings.

Accordingly, the Court directed the NFAC to decide the section 154 rectification petition within three months &  ordered that recovery proceedings remain stayed until then.

Held: Writ petition disposed of; recovery stayed pending rectification decision.

FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF KERALA HIGH COURT

The petitioner is the proprietor of a firm and is an assesee under the Income Tax Act 1961. The petitioner, being aggrieved by Ext.P6, a rectified assessment order pertaining to the assessment year 2015-2016, submitted an appeal before the 4th respondent, a copy of which is produced as Ext.P18. However, the appeal was dismissed by the 5th respondent as per Ext.P11 order, on the ground that the petitioner failed to explain properly the delay of 704 days, in filing the appeal. Thus, without going into the merits of the case, the appeal was rejected. Subsequently, the petitioner submitted Ext.P12 application for rectification, which is now pending consideration. This writ petition is submitted by the petitioner challenging Ext.P11 order passed in appeal, on the ground that the said order was passed erroneously, without properly considering the reasons furnished by the petitioner for condoning the delay.

Paid content

Become a Basic or Premium Member, or log in if you are already a Basic or Premium member.

Advertisement

Author Info

CA Vijayakumar Shetty
Qualification: CA in Practice
Company: Shetty & Co, Chartered Accountants, Mangalore
Location: Mangalore, Karnataka
Articles Published: 6,281

Join TaxGuru's Network for the latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.