THE CHIRAYINKEEZHU SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.1155 vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2 (5)

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/10742/2024HC KeralaKLHC01092225202415 March 2024Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's stay application (Ext.P4) and application for condonation of delay (Ext.P5) within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the judgment. The ITAT is to afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Crucially, all recovery proceedings against the petitioner, concerning the amounts determined in the assessment order (Ext.P1) as modified/confirmed by the appellate authority (Ext.P2), shall be kept in abeyance until orders are passed on Exts.P4 and P5. The Court clarified that the ITAT would only pass orders on the stay application (Ext.P4) on merits if it decides to condone the delay in filing the appeal (Ext.P3).

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Chirayinkeezhu Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., is challenging an order of assessment for the assessment year 2017-18 (Ext.P1). Their appeal before the first appellate authority was dismissed (Ext.P2). Subsequently, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) (Ext.P3), along with an application for stay (Ext.P4) and an application for condonation of delay (Ext.P5). The present writ petition seeks a limited relief: a stay on the recovery of amounts due as per the assessment order, pending the ITAT's decision on the delay and stay petitions.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal should be directed to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's applications for stay and condonation of delay in filing their appeal, and if so, within what timeframe? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner seeks a direction for the ITAT to consider their stay and delay condonation applications, and for a stay on recovery proceedings until these applications are decided. Revenue's Contention: The learned Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department appeared and was heard. No specific arguments are recorded for the revenue beyond their appearance.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. FRIDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 25TH PHALGUNA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 10742 OF 2024 PETITIONER/S: THE CHIRAYINKEEZHU SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.1155 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY-IN-CHARGE, CHIRAYINKEEZHU P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT., PIN - 695304 BY ADVS. ARJUN RAGHAVAN T.R.HARIKUMAR POOJA PANKAJ RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2 (5) OFFICE OF THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-2, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695003 2 THE REGISTRAR, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, KENDRIYA BHAVAN, BLOCK NO.C1 & C2, 1ST FLOOR, KAKKANAD, COCHIN., PIN - 682030 BY ADV ADV. P.G. JAYASHANKAR SRI. P G JAYA SHANKAR (SR SC) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 10742 OF 2024 2

JUDGMENT Petitioner suffered Ext.P1 order of assessment for the assessment year 2017-18. The appeal filed by the petitioner before the first Appellate Authority was dismissed by Ext.P2 order. The petitioner has now filed Ext.P3 appeal together with Ext.P4 application for stay and Ext.P5 application for condonation of delay before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The only limited relief now sought for by the petitioner is to stay recovery of amounts found payable by the petitioner in terms of Ext.P1 order of assessment as modified/confirmed by Ext.P2 order of the Appellate Authority, pending consideration of the delay petition and stay petition, before the Income Tax Appellate Authority.

2.

Heard Sri. P.G. Jaya Shankar, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Income Tax Department also.

3.

Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Income Tax Department, I am of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of, directing the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal to consider and pass orders on Exts.P4 stay petition and Ext.P5 application for condonation of delay filed in Ext.P3 appeal, within

WP(C) NO. 10742 OF 2024 3 a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Till such time as orders are passed on Exts. P4 and P5 applications, any proceedings for recovery of the amounts found payable by the petitioner in terms of Ext.P1 assessment order as modified/confirmed by Ext.P2 shall be kept in abeyance. It is made clear that the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal needs to pass orders on merits on Exts.P4 application for stay only if it decides to condone the delay in filing the appeal. GOPINATH P. JUDGE ajt

WP(C) NO. 10742 OF 2024 4

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 10742/2024 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit-P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2017-2018 DATED 19-12-2019 Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 03-03-2023 ISSUED BY THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY Exhibit-P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT TRIBUNAL DATED 22-12-2023 Exhibit-P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION ALONG WITH AFFIDAVIT FILED IN EXT-P3 APPEAL, DATED 22- 12-2023 Exhibit-P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT AND PETITION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY DATED 22-12-2023 Exhibit-P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 24-02-2020 IN WP(C) NO.5205 OF 2020 Exhibit-P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 19-07-2019 IN W.A NO.1639 OF 2019 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT Exhibit-P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 11-07-2022 IN WP(C) NO.22397 OF 2022 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →