THE MANNARKKAD RURAL SERVICE CO-OPOERATIVE BANK LTD. vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/22496/2019HC KeralaKLHC01057828201919 August 2019Author: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI4 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Mannarkkad Rural Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The petitioner sought a direction for the disposal of its statutory appeal pending before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and for a stay on recovery proceedings. The petitioner relied on a Division Bench judgment in W.A No.1536 of 2019 and connected cases, which directed the disposal of appeals and stay of recovery during the pendency of appeals. The Standing Counsel for the revenue admitted that the facts of the present case were substantially similar to those in the cited judgment.

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to consider and dispose of the statutory appeal filed by the petitioner at the earliest. The Court also ordered that recovery proceedings and the collection of tax assessed be kept in abeyance pending the disposal of the appeal. This decision was based on the admission by the revenue's counsel that the facts were similar to a previous Division Bench judgment and in light 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 operative direction is to dispose of the appeal expeditiously and to stay recovery during that period.

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? 2. Whether recovery proceedings and collection of tax assessed should be kept in abeyance pending the disposal of the appeal? Assessee's Contentions: The petitioner contended that a Division Bench judgment in W.A No.1536 of 2019 and connected cases directed the disposal of appeals and stay of recovery proceedings during the pendency of appeals. The petitioner relied on this precedent to seek similar relief. Revenue's Contentions: The Standing Counsel for the respondents admitted that the facts of the case were substantially the same as those in the Division Bench judgment relied upon by the petitioner, and therefore, the said judgment could be followed.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI MONDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF AUGUST 2019 / 28TH SRAVANA, 1941 WP(C).No.22496 OF 2019 PETITIONER/S: THE MANNARKKAD RURAL SERVICE CO-OPOERATIVE BANK LTD.NO. P 922, 8/767, MANNARKKAD, PALAKKAD - 678 582, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, M. PURUSHOTHAMAN, AGED 52, S/O. MADHAVANA NAIR. BY ADVS. SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON SMT.MEERA V.MENON RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 4, AYAKAR BHAVAN, PALAKKAD - 678 014. 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) SAKTHAN NAGAR, THRISSUR - 680 001. 3 THE PALAKKAD DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. HEAD OFFICE, SULTHANPET, PALAKKAD, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER. SC SRI JOSE JOSEPH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19.08.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

-2- WP(C) NO.22496 OF 2019

JUDGMENT Heard Sri. Harisankar V.Menon, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Jose Joseph, the learned Standing Counsel for respondents.

Petitioner refers to and relies on Ext.P5 judgment in W.A No.1536 of 2019 and connected cases dated 01.07.2019 to contend that the Division Bench directed disposal of appeal and

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 →