THE MALAPPURAM DISTRICT CO-OP. BANK LTD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2,TIRUR

ITA/214/2013HC KeralaKLHC01026099201329 October 2014Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN,HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What were the facts?

The appeal is filed by The Malappuram District Co-operative Bank Ltd. against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Cochin Bench, dated February 15, 2013. This order pertains to the assessment year 2007-2008. The ITAT had dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant. The appellant's contention is not that the principles laid down in a previous High Court judgment are inapplicable, but rather that a Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed against that judgment is pending before the Apex Court. The High Court notes that another Division Bench of the same court has also followed the aforementioned judgment.

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the pendency of a Special Leave Petition (SLP) before the Apex Court does not, in any manner, dilute the precedent value of the judgment of the High Court. The Tribunal had dismissed the appeal by following the judgment of this Court in CIT v. Lord Krishna Bank [339 ITR 606]. The appellant conceded that the principles laid down in Lord Krishna Bank were applicable but pointed to the pending SLP. The Court further noted that another Division Bench of the High Court had also followed the judgment in Lord Krishna Bank's case in Kannur District Co-operative Bank Limited v. Commissioner of Income Tax [365 ITR 343]. Consequently, finding no merit in the appeal, the High Court dismissed it.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the pendency of a Special Leave Petition (SLP) before the Apex Court against a High Court judgment dilutes the precedent value of that judgment for subsequent cases. Assessee's Contention: The assessee argues that because an SLP has been filed against the High Court judgment in CIT v. Lord Krishna Bank, which the Tribunal followed, the Tribunal's decision in the present case, which also relied on Lord Krishna Bank, is flawed. The assessee implicitly contends that the pending SLP creates uncertainty or a potential for the precedent to be overturned. Revenue's Contention: The revenue has not recorded any specific contentions in the judgment. However, the High Court's reasoning implies that the revenue would support the Tribunal's decision based on the established precedent.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN WEDNE AY, THE 29TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2014/7TH KARTHIKA, 1936 ----------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN ITA 152/2012 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH DATED 15.2.2013 APPELLANT: ----------------- THE MALAPPURAM DISTRICT CO-OP. BANK LTD UP HILL MALPPURAM-REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT. BY ADVS.SRI.K.ANAND (SR.) SMT.LATHA KRISHNAN RESPONDENTS: --------------------- 1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2,TIRUR.

2.

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) CALICUT 3. INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN. R BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC FOR INCOME TAX THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29-10-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE 1:OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 2.12.2009. ANNEXURE 2:OF ORDER DATED 29.8.2011 OF THE SECOND RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE 3:OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM FILED BY THE APPELLANT BEFORE THE THIRD

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →