Assistant Commissioner vs. A.R. Tiles
Original PDF →IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI WEDNE AY, THE 4TH DAY OF JANUARY 2023 / 14TH POUSHA, 1944 WA NO. 17 OF 2021 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 23619/2020 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA APPELLANT:
1 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (NOW DESIGNATED AS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER), SPECIAL CIRCLE III, STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, ASRAMAM, KOLLAM-691 002. 2 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, TAXES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER RESPONDENT:
A.R. TILES SUDHARMONY, KANNIMEL VEEDU, AYYATHIL P.O., KOLLAM-691 021, REPRESENTED BY REGHU.K., MG. PARTNER. OTHER PRESENT:
GP M.M. JASMIN THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.01.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA No.17/2021
-2- JUDGMENT
S.V.Bhatti, J.
Assistant Commissioner, Special Circle- III is the appellant. A.R. Tiles is the respondent. The appeal arises from the judgment dated 04.11.2020 in W.P.(C) No.23619/2020. 2. The issue involved in the writ petition was covered by the common judgment dated 06.12.2019 in W.P.(C) No.9963/2019 and batch. The writ petition was allowed as indicated in the common judgment dated 06.12.2019. The counsel appearing for the parties submit that the writ petition was allowed by following the common judgment dated 06.12.2019 on an erroneous view of the facts, i.e., the assessment year for which the juri ictional officer issued the order of assessment. The writ petition challenges the assessment order dated 23.03.2020 and relates to the period of return 2013-14. 3. The counsel submit that the common judgment
WA No.17/2021
-3- 06.12.2019 is not applicable to the facts of the case. The reference to the above circumstances, needless to observe, would have led to setting aside the common judgment in so far as the writ petition is concerned. The other circumstance on merit in the writ petition is that the assessment order marked as Ext.P4, for all purposes, has been made without affording even a semblance of opportunity to the petitioner.
We do not want to examine the merits or the conclusions recorded by the Assessing Officer in our review. We are satisfied by taking note of the chronology of events referred to in the assessment order; that sufficient opportunity was denied to the writ petitioner/respondent before making the order of assessment. For the above reasons, Ext.P4 impugned in W.P.(C) No. 23619/2020 is set aside and the matter is remitted to the Assessing Officer for consideration and disposal in accordance with law.
WA No.17/2021
-4-
Writ appeal is allowed as indicated above.
S.V.BHATTI JUDGE
BASANT BALAJI JUDGE
JS
Reproduced from the public record of the Kerala High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.