PEROORKADA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/31174/2023HC KeralaKLHC01069006202325 September 2023Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D. K. SINGH5 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the Writ Petition was not maintainable because the petitioner had already approached the appellate authority against the assessment order. The Court observed that the petitioner's appeal concerning the assessment orders should be considered by the appellate authority. The Court granted liberty to the petitioner to file a stay application within two days from the date of the order. The appellate authority was directed to consider the appeal and the stay application expeditiously, in accordance with the law, and pass an appropriate order within one month. The Court did not decide on the merits of the assessment or the stay application itself, but rather on the procedural aspect of the writ petition's maintainability and directed the appellate process to proceed.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Peroorkada Service Co-operative Bank Limited, filed a writ petition challenging recovery steps taken pursuant to assessment orders for assessment year 2013-2014. The petitioner is a co-operative society registered under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969. The assessing authority's order dated February 2, 2022, allowed a deduction of Rs. 50,08,06,922/- under Section 80P, assessing total income at Rs. 44,77,32,810/-. The total demand raised was Rs. 31,51,58,528/-. The petitioner had filed an appeal against this assessment order before the appellate authority without an interim stay application. The petitioner also indicated that there was a demand in a subsequent year.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Writ Petition is maintainable when the petitioner has already approached the appellate authority against the assessment order? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the Court may direct the appellate authority to consider their stay application expeditiously. The petitioner stated they would file a stay application in the pending appeal. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the revenue. However, the Court's observation implies that the revenue's actions (recovery steps) were based on the assessment order.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80P

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 DINESH KUMAR SINGH MONDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2023 / 3RD ASWINA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 31174 OF 2023 PETITIONER: PEROORKADA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED NO.T.1412, PEROORKADA P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN – 965 005 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. BY ADV C.A.JOJO RESPONDENTS: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER INCOME TAX OFFICE, WARD-2(1), KOWDIAR, TRIVANDRUM, PIN – 695 003. 2 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-1 OFFIE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), TRIVANDRUM, PIN – 695 003. 3 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110001, PIN – 110 001. 4 ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 1ST FLOOR, BLOCK C-I & C II, KENDRIYA BHAVAN, KAKKANAD, PIN – 682 037. OTHER PRESENT: CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM-SC-IT THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.09.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 31174 OF 2023 2 DINESH KUMAR SINGH, J. -------------------------------------------- WP(C) NO. 31174 OF 2023 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of September, 2023

J U D G M E N T

1.

The present Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner interalia questioning the steps taken in pursuance to Ext.P6 and Ext.P9 for recovery of assessment tax of Rs.45,32,05,847/-.

2.

The petitioner claims to be a Co-operative Society, registered under the provisions of Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969. The petitioner has filed appeal against Ext.P3 assessment order dated 02.02.2022 for the assessment year 2013- 2014 before the appellate authority, without any application for interim stay. The assessing authority, through Ext.P3 assessment order has allowed deduction under Section 80P for an WP(C) NO. 31174 OF 2023 3 amount of Rs.50,08,06,922/- and total income assessed for Tax is Rs.44,77,32,810/-. The total demand payable is 31,51,58,528/- in respect of the assessment year 2013-2014. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the subsequent year also there is demand. Considering the facts that the petitioner has already approached the appellate authority, this Court does not find this Writ Petition as maintainable. Petitioner’s appeal in respect of the assessment orders shall be considered by the appellate authority.

4.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner will file a stay application in the pending appeal and this Court may direct the appellate authority to consider the stay application of the petitioner expeditiously.

5.

Considering the aforesaid prayer and WP(C) NO. 31174 OF 2023 4 submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, this writ petition is disposed of, giving liberty to the petitioner to file a stay application within a period of 2 days from today. The appellate authority should consider Ext.P5 appeal and stay application as expeditiously in accordance with law and pass appropriate order within a period of one month.

6.

With the aforesaid direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. DINESH KUMAR SINGH JUDGE rpr

WP(C) NO. 31174 OF 2023 5

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 31174/2023 PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ITAT ORDER IN ITA NO. 47/COCH/2019, ITA NO.141/COCH/2019, ITA NO.93/COCH/2018 AND ITA NO.400/COCH/2018 DATED 26.06.2019 Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FOR RECTIFICATION OF MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORDS U/S 254 DATED 19.05.2023 Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE AND ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 02.02.2022 Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER GIVING EFFECT TO THE ORDER OF CIT (APPEALS) U/S 250 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 17.04.2023 Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 14.08.2023 Exhibit P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF DEMAND ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 12.09.2023 Exhibit 7 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY LETTER SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 15.09.2023 Exhibit P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FOR RECTIFICATION OF MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORDS DATED 06.05.2023 Exhibit P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF DEMAND ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 12.09.2023 Exhibit P10 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY LETTER SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 15.09.2023

More judgments on Section 80P

All 5,069 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80P →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →