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

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/42106/2022HC KeralaKLHC01091376202222 December 2022Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala did not decide the merits of the assessment orders or the applicability of the Supreme Court's judgment in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. Instead, the Court deemed it appropriate to direct the Appellate Authority (the 3rd respondent, National Faceless Appeal Centre) to consider the pending appeals (Exts.P3 and P4) in a time-bound manner. The Court ordered the 3rd respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on the appeals expeditiously. Furthermore, the Court granted interim relief by directing that no coercive steps shall be initiated against the petitioner pursuant to the assessment orders (Exts.P1 and P2) until the disposal of the appeals. The core principle here is that when statutory appeals are pending, the High Court, in its writ jurisdiction, will generally direct expeditious disposal rather than adjudicating the underlying tax dispute, especially when interim protection is warranted.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Pazhavangadikara Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., a Primary Agricultural Credit Society, is challenging assessment orders dated December 31, 2019, and September 21, 2022. The Assessing Officer rejected the petitioner's claim for deduction under Section 80P, citing a lack of evidence that the petitioner met the criteria for a Primary Agricultural Credit Society under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act. The petitioner contends that the Supreme Court's judgment in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax governs the situation and renders the assessment incorrect. The petitioner has already filed appeals against these assessment orders, which are pending before the National Faceless Appeal Centre, New Delhi (the 3rd respondent). This writ petition was filed seeking a direction for the expeditious disposal of these pending appeals.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the assessment orders rejecting the deduction under Section 80P are incorrect in light of the Supreme Court's judgment in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax (2021 (1) KLT 485)? (Question of law) Assessee's Contentions: - The petitioner argues that the Supreme Court's decision in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax is now the governing precedent and supports their claim for deduction under Section 80P. - They contend that the assessment orders are therefore incorrect based on this established legal position. Revenue's Contentions: - The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the revenue in response to this writ petition. The revenue's position would have been articulated before the Assessing Officer and the Appellate Authority.

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 GOPINATH P. THURSDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 1ST POUSHA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 42106 OF 2022 PETITIONER: THE PAZHAVANGADIKARA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD II/453A, PAZHAVANGADI P.O., RANNY, PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN – 673 121. REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY SREEKUMAR P. S. BY ADV SANTHOSH P.ABRAHAM RESPONDENTS: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD NO. I AND TPS, THIRUVALLA., PIN – 689 101. 2 THE ADDITIONAL/JOINT/ DEPUTY ASSESSMENT OF INCOME TAX/ INCOME TAX OFFICER, NATIONAL E. ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NEW DELHI., PIN – 110 001. 3 THE NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, NEW DELHI, PIN – 100 001. REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER. BY ADV JOSE JOSEPH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22.12.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) No.42106/2022 -:2:-

JUDGMENT Petitioner is a Primary Agricultural Credit Society registered under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969. Exts.P1 & P2 assessment orders were issued against the petitioner on 31-12-2019 & 21-09-2022 respectively. In the assessment orders, petitioner's claim for deduction under Section 80P was rejected on the ground that there was no evidence to show that petitioner satisfied the ingredients of the Primary Agricultural Credit Society as contemplated under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act.

2.

While assailing the assessment order before the 3rd respondent, petitioner has sought to canvas that the judgment of the Supreme Court in Mavilayi Service Co- operative Bank Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax [2021 (1) KLT 485] now governs the field thereby rendering the assessment itself as incorrect.

3.

Since the petitioner has already preferred appeals as Exts.P3 and P4 and the same are pending consideration before the 3rd respondent, I deem it fit that this writ petition be disposed of directing the Appellate Authority to consider the appeal in a time bound manner.

4.

Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 3rd respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Exts.P3 and P4 as expeditiously as possible.

5.

Till the disposal of the appeal, no coercive steps shall be initiated against the petitioner pursuant to Exts.P1& P2 assessment orders. The writ petition is disposed of as above. GOPINATH P.

JUDGE ats

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 42106/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P-1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO.AAAAT6882G/2017-18 DATED 31-12-2019 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT Exhibit P-2 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO. AAAAT6882G/2020-21 DATED 21-09-2022 WITH THE COMPUTATION SHEET ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P-3 RESPONDENT, NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, AGAINST THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDERS. TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 28- 01-2020 FOR THE YEAR 2017-18 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT Exhibit P-4 . TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 21-10-2022 FOR THE YEAR 2020-21 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT Exhibit P-5 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 26-01- 2020 FOR THE YEAR 2017-18 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT Exhibit P-6 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 20-10- 2022 FOR THE YEAR 2020-21 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT Exhibit P-7 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.AAAAT6882G/2020- 21 DATED 18-11-2022 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT

More judgments on Section 80P

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →