AVINISSERY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/23352/2019HC KeralaKLHC01060157201929 August 2019Author: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI3 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Avinissery Service Co-operative Bank Ltd, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The petitioner sought directions regarding its pending statutory appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The petitioner relied on a previous Division Bench judgment in W.A. No. 1536 of 2019 and connected cases, which directed the disposal of appeals and granted a stay on recovery proceedings during the pendency of the appeal. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) were the respondents. The assessment year(s) are not explicitly stated in the judgment.

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (2nd respondent) to consider and dispose of the statutory appeal filed by the petitioner at the earliest. The Court also ordered that recovery proceedings and collection of assessed tax be kept in abeyance pending the disposal of the appeal. This decision was based on the petitioner's reliance on a previous Division Bench judgment (W.A. No. 1536 of 2019) and the admission by the revenue's counsel that the facts were substantially similar. The Court explicitly mentioned taking note of the Full Bench decision in The Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd, v. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Calicut [2019 (2) KHC 287]. The ratio of this judgment is that when an appeal is pending before the appellate authority and the facts are similar to a precedent where a stay on recovery was granted, the appellate authority should be directed to dispose of the appeal expeditiously and recovery should be stayed.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) should be directed to dispose of the statutory appeal filed by the petitioner at the earliest, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and relevant precedents? (Question of law and fact, turning on principles of natural justice and procedural fairness). 2. Whether recovery proceedings and collection of assessed tax should be kept in abeyance pending the disposal of the statutory appeal? (Question of law, turning on the powers of the appellate authority and the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution). Assessee's Contentions: The petitioner contended that the Division Bench in W.A. No. 1536 of 2019 had directed the disposal of appeals and granted a stay on recovery proceedings during the pendency of the appeal. They argued that their case was substantially similar and thus the same directions should be followed. Revenue's Contentions: The learned Standing Counsel for the respondents admitted that the facts of the case were substantially the same and similar to those noted by the Division Bench in W.A. No. 1536 of 2019 and could be followed.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Heard together (2 matters)

WP(C).No.23352 OF 2019

W.A No.1536 of 2019

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI THUR AY, THE 29TH DAY OF AUGUST 2019 / 7TH BHADRA, 1941 WP(C).No.23352 OF 2019(T) PETITIONER: AVINISSERY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO. 400, P.O. AVINISSERY 680 313, OLLUR THRISSUR REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. BY ADVS. SRI.M.SASINDRAN SRI.V.VENUGOPAL RESPONDENTS: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2 (1), AYAKAR BHAVAN, INCOME TAX OFFICER, SHAKTHANTHAMPURAM NAGAR, THRISSUR 680 001. 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), 3RD FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, THRISSUR 680 001. SC SRI. JOSE JOSEPH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29.08.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No.23352 OF 2019(T) 2 JUDGMENT Dated this the 29th day of August 2019 Heard Sri. M. Sasindran, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Jose Joseph, the learned Standing Counsel for respondents.

Petitioner refers to and relies on judgment dated 01.07.2019 in W.A No.1536 of 2019 and connected cases to contend that the Division Bench directed disposal of appeal and granted stay of recovery proceedings during the pendency of the appeal.

The learned Standing Counsel admits

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 account Sign 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 →