The Plantation Corporation of Kerala Ltd. v. The Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle- 1, Kottayam / The Commissioner of Income-tax, Kottayam
[Citation -2015-LL-0325-122]

Citation 2015-LL-0325-122
Appellant Name The Plantation Corporation of Kerala Ltd.
Respondent Name The Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle- 1, Kottayam / The Commissioner of Income-tax, Kottayam
Court HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 25/03/2015
Assessment Year 2009-10
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags proceedings for reassessment • revision application • reassessment order • specific provision • revision petition • tds certificate


IN HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, 25TH DAY OF MARCH 2015/4TH CHAITHRA, 1937 WP(C).No. 9454 of 2015 (F) PETITIONER(S): PLANTATION CORPORATION OF KERALA LTD., KOTTAYAM -686 004., REPRESENTED BY MANAGING DIRECTOR A.UNNIKRISHNAN. BY ADV. SRI.RAMESH CHERIAN JOHN RESPONDENT(S)- 1. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 1, PUBLIC LIBRARY BUILDINGS, SASTHRI ROAD, KOTTAYAM -686 001. 2. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUBLIC LIBRARY BUILDINGS, SASTHRI ROAD, KOTTAYAM -686 001. R BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25-03-2015, COURT ON SAME DAY DELIVERED FOLLOWING: vmr WP(C).No. 9454 of 2015 (F) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS- EXHIBIT P1- TRUE COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 21/12/2011. EXHIBIT P2- TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 10/06/2011 BY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER TO PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P3- TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 24/06/2011 OF PETITIONER TO ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, INCOME TAX. EXHIBIT P4- TRUE COPY OF TDS CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY CANARA BANK DATED 05/05/2009. EXHIBIT P5- TRUE COPY OF AUDIT REPORT BY CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS DATED 25/09/2009 IN FORM NO 3 CA AND FORM NO 3CD. EXHIBIT P6- TRUE COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED BY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, INCOME TAX, UNDER SECTION 148 DATED 17/02/2014. EXHIBIT P7- TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 12/06/2014 SENT BY PETITIONER TO ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, INCOME TAX. EXHIBIT P8- TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 21/07/2014 ISSUED TO PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P9- TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 30/07/2014 ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT TO PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P10- TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 11/08/2014 OF PETITIONER TO 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P11- TRUE COPY OF SCHEDULE-G OF BALANCE SHEET. EXHIBIT P12- TRUE COPY OF TRIBUNAL ORDER DATED 09/10/2009. EXHIBIT P13- TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 20/10/2014 ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P14- TRUE COPY OF REVISION PETITION DATED 04/11/2014 FILED BEFORE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P15- TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 24/02/2015 PASSED BY 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P16- TRUE COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 26/02/2015 PASSED BY 1ST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS EXHIBIT : NIL ---------------------------------- /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE vmr A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J. =========================================== W.P.(C). No. 9454 of 2015 ===================================================== Dated this 25th day of March, 2015 JUDGMENT petitioner, plantation company fully owned by Government of Kerala, is aggrieved by Ext.P16 order of assessment, that was passed against it in terms of Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of Income Tax Act. case of petitioner in writ petition is that, while assessment in respect of petitioner company for year 2009-10 had originally been completed by Ext.P1 assessment order, respondents had, subsequently, initiated proceedings for reassessment by issuing notice under Section 148 of Income Tax Act. petitioner then approached respondents seeking reasons, on basis of which assessment was proposed to be reopened, and respondents furnished detailed reasons by Ext.P9 communication. While petitioner preferred his objections to reasons stated in Ext.P9 communication, said objections were overruled by assessing officer by Ext.P13 order. petitioner then preferred revision against Ext.P13 order before revisional authority under Section 264 of Income Tax Act. said revision petition came to be dismissed by revisional authority on ground that, revision application was not maintainable inasmuch as Ext.P13 order could not trace its -2- W.P.(C). No. 9454 of 2015 validity to any specific provision of Income Tax Act. Immediately thereafter, assessing authority proceeded to pass Ext.P16 reassessment order, which is impugned in writ petition. 2. I have heard learned counsel appearing for petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondents as well. 3. On consideration of facts and circumstances of case, and submissions made across bar, I find that inasmuch as Ext.P16 order, passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of Income Tax Act, is appealable one, and there is no jurisdictional error pointed out in respect of said order, challenge to Ext.P16 order, in proceedings under Article 226 of Constitution of India, cannot be maintained. While it is specific case of petitioner that reasons communicated to petitioner for reopening assessment, and reasons that were given in Ext.P13 order, while rejecting objections filed by petitioner, are not valid, I am of view that, at this distance of time, when 1st respondent has already passed -3- W.P.(C). No. 9454 of 2015 assessment order under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of Income Tax Act, said contention may not be of much avail to petitioner. Thus, relegating petitioner to alternate remedy of filing appeal against Ext.P16 order, before appellate authority under Income Tax Act, I dismiss writ petition, in its challenge against Ext.P16 order. sd/- A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE das Plantation Corporation of Kerala Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle- 1, Kottayam / Commissioner of Income-tax, Kottayam
Report Error