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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 28327

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Ziyad Rahman A.A., J
Roshanara Beegam – Appellant
Versus
The Income Tax Officer Ward 2(1) – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 15006 OF 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SMT.DIVYA RAVINDRAN
For the Respondents: SHRI.P.R.AJITHKUMAR, SC

Pending appeal against assessment bars recovery proceedings until disposal.

Headnote:First Paragraph: Relevant provisions under Income Tax Act concern assessment orders and appeals (Ext.P1 assessment for AY 2016-17; Ext.P2 appeal filed 17.01.2020). Petitioner challenged recovery proceedings amid pending appeal, with responses to hearing notices (Exts.P3-P8). Court found initiation of recovery improper during pendency. Second Paragraph: Issue framed as whether recovery proper despite pending appeal since 2020. Ratio: Pending appeal bars recovery proceedings until disposal, ensuring fairness. Third Paragraph: Writ petition disposed directing 2nd respondent to dispose appeal expeditiously; no recovery until final orders.

Table of Content
1. recovery improper during pending appeal (Para 1 , 2)
2. direct appeal disposal; stay recovery (Para 3)

JUDGMENT

The petitioner is aggrieved by the recovery proceedings that are being pursued against the petitioner, based on Ext.P1 assessment order, despite the fact that the appeal submitted by the petitioner as evidenced by Ext.P2 against Ext.P1, is even now pending consideration.

2. It is pointed out that hearing notices were issued to the petitioner, as evidenced by Exts. P3 and P5, on 06.01.2022 and 12.05.2022, and the petitioner had submitted a reply to the same. Thereafter, Ext.P7 hearing notice was issued on 15.10.2023, to which also the petitioner responded, but the appeal has not been disposed of so far.

3. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, I am of the view that, since the appeal has been pending consideration since 2020, the initiation of recovery proceedings at this juncture is not proper.

Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of, directing the 2nd respondent to dispose of Ext.P2 appeal as expeditiously as possible. It is ordered that, until the final orders are passed on the appeal, no recovery proceedings based on Ext.1 shall be initiated against the petitioner.

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