SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1984 Supreme(Ker) 310

High Court of Kerala
K.S.Paripoornan, J.
Ms Paul Mathew And Co - Appellant
Versus
Income Tax Officer Alwaye - Respondent
O.P. No. 830 of 1983
Decided On : 31-05-1984

The decision rendered by the Appellate Tribunal under S.254(1) is final, subject to an order that should be or may be passed as a equal to the decision rendered in a reference made under S.256.

Headnote:

Income Tax - Registration Cancellation - S.185 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 - S.254, S.256, S.259, S.260 - The court discussed the relevance of the sections of the Income Tax Act and the decisions cited by the petitioner's counsel. It emphasized that the decision rendered by the Appellate Tribunal under S.254(1) is final, subject to an order that should be or may be passed as a equal to the decision rendered in a reference made under S.256. The court rejected the contention that the order of stay passed by the Tribunal will be operative or alive till the disposal of the income tax referred cases by the High Court and thereafter, till consequential orders are passed by the Appellate Tribunal under S.260(1) read with S.254 of the Act to give effect to the orders that may be passed by the High Court.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a firm of transport contractors, was granted registration under S.185 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 1971-72. The registration was cancelled for the years 1972-73 to 1976-77. The petitioner filed appeals, and pending the appeals before the Appellate Tribunal, a stay of recovery proceedings was ordered. The Appellate Tribunal dismissed the appeals, and recovery proceedings were initiated by the Revenue. The petitioner filed an Original Petition assailing the recovery proceedings.

Finding of the Court:

The court rejected the petitioner's contention that the order of stay passed by the Tribunal would be operative till the disposal of the income tax referred cases by the High Court and thereafter, till consequential orders are passed by the Appellate Tribunal under S.260(1) read with S.254 of the Act to give effect to the orders that may be passed by the High Court.

Issues: The main issue was whether the order of stay passed by the Appellate Tribunal would be operative till the disposal of the income tax referred cases by the High Court and thereafter, till consequential orders are passed by the Appellate Tribunal under S.260(1) read with S.254 of the Act to give effect to the orders that may be passed by the High Court.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the decision rendered by the Appellate Tribunal under S.254(1) is final, subject to an order that should be or may be passed as a equal to the decision rendered in a reference made under S.256. It rejected the contention that the order of stay passed by the Tribunal would be operative or alive till the disposal of the income tax referred cases by the High Court and thereafter, till consequential orders are passed by the Appellate Tribunal under S.260(1) read with S.254 of the Act to give effect to the orders that may be passed by the High Court.

Final Decision: The Original Petition was dismissed with costs, including counsel's fee Rs. 250.

JUDGMENT

1. The petitioner is a firm of transport contractors. It is an assessee borne on the files of the 1st respondent Income Tax Officer, A-ward, Alwaye. It was granted registration under S.185 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 1971-72. This benefit continued for the years 1972-73 to 1976-77 as the assessee filed declarations in form No. 12. Subsequently, the 1st respondent passed an order cancelling the registration for the above years. The petitioner filed appeals before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Ernakulam. The appeals were dismissed. The petitioner filed second appeals. Pending the appeals before the Appellate Tribunal, on motion by the petitioner, the appellate Tribunal passed a common order of stay of collection of tax as per the revised assessment orders (Ext. P-1, dated 27th February 1982). By Ext. P-1, stay of recovery proceedings, was ordered subject to certain conditions. Finally, the Appellate Tribunal dismissed the appeals. On motion made by the petitioner, the Appellate Tribunal referred certain questions of law for the opinion of this court, evidenced by Ext. P-2 order, dated 12th November, 1982. After the dismissal of the appeals by the Appellate Tribunal recovery proceedings were taken by the Revenue. The petitioner prayed for stay of recovery proceedings as evidenced by Ext. P-3, petition dated Nil. According to the petitioner, the questions of law referred by the Appellate Tribunal as per Ext. P-2, were pending for consideration in the High Court (R.A. No. 350 to 356 corresponding to ITR 464 to 470 of 1982) and till the decision is rendered by the High Court in the referred cases, and thereafter the Appellate Tribunal passes an order as envisaged by S.260(1) of the Income Tax Act, it cannot be said that the appeals have been "finally disposed of" by the Tribunal. Till such orders are passed by the Appellate Tribunal, the appeals filed before the Appellate Tribunal are pending, In this view, since the appeals are still pending, the stay ordered by the Appellate Tribunal as per Ext. P1 is still in force (even during pendency of Referred cases in this court) and so recovery proceedings are incompetent and without jurisdiction. The respondents have not disposed of Ext. P-3 petition and recovery proceedings are being pursued. So, this Original Petition was necessitated, assailing the recovery proceedings, taken by the Revenue. In the O. P. the petitioner has prayed for the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents not to pursue the recovery proceedings for the recovery of the tax levied on the petitioner while giving effect to the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) pending "final disposal of the appeals by the Tribunal" conformably to the judgment of the High Court in ITR No. 464 to 470 of 1982 and for other reliefs.

2. Counsel for the petitioner contended that when once references are pending in this court, the appeals filed before the Tribunal are not "finally disposed of". It is only after a decision is rendered in the referred cases by this Court under S.259 read with S.260 of the Income Tax Act and as a equal thereto the Appellate Tribunal also passes "final orders" as contemplated by S.260(1) of the Act the appeals are "finally disposed of". Till such final disposal of the appeals by the Appellate Tribunal, the appeals are or should be deemed to be pending. On these premises, it is contended by petitioner's counsel, that the order of stay granted by the Appellate Tribunal, as evidenced by Ext. P-1, will be operative and effective till the consequential orders are passed by the Appellate Tribunal under S.260(1) of the Act. Any recovery proceedings during the pendency of the referred cases in this court is incompetent. Counsel relied on certain passages from the decisions reported in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal v. Cambatta and Co. Ltd. 29 ITR 118 (Bombay), Esthuri Aswathiah v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Mysore 66 ITR 478 (SC), Commissioner of In






















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top