THE PAPPINIVATTAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS),
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court disposed of the writ petitions by directing the 1st respondent, the Appellate Authority (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)), to consider and pass appropriate orders on the appeals filed by the petitioner (Ext.P2) as expeditiously as possible. The Court further directed that no coercive steps shall be resorted to against the petitioner-Society until the appeals are disposed of. The reasoning for this decision is based on the petitioner's submission that similar directions were issued by the High Court in analogous matters, citing previous writ and appeal judgments that relied on a Full Bench decision. The Court found these submissions persuasive and felt the petitions could be disposed of in a similar manner. No specific issue was left undecided.
What were the facts?
The petitioner, The Pappinivattam Service Co-operative Society Ltd., filed three writ petitions before the High Court of Kerala challenging income tax assessment orders for the assessment years 2012-13, 2013-14, and 2015-16. The petitioner had filed appeals against these assessment orders before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). While these appeals were pending, the Income Tax Officer issued notices under Section 221(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the recovery of the assessed amounts. The petitioner sought a direction for the appellate authority to consider their appeals and to stay coercive recovery steps.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the High Court should direct the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to consider and dispose of the pending statutory appeals filed by the petitioner expeditiously, and refrain from coercive recovery steps until the appeals are decided? (Question of procedure and discretion) The petitioner argued that in identical cases, the High Court had previously directed the appellate authority to consider appeals promptly and not to take coercive steps during the pendency of the appeals. The petitioner relied on a previous order in W.P.(C) No.13364/2019 and a Division Bench judgment in W.A. No.1529/2019, which in turn referred to a Full Bench decision in The Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Calicut [2019 (2) KHC 287]. The revenue, represented by the Standing Counsel for the Department of Income Tax, was heard, but their specific contentions are not recorded in the judgment.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Heard together (3 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
J U D G M E N T ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ [W.P. (C) .20015/2019, 20016/2019 & 20017/2019] These writ petitions have been filed by the petitioner which is a Co-operative Society registered under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act. Income tax assessment orders have been passed in respect of the Society for the years 2012-13, 2013-14 and 2015-16 as per Ext.P1 in all the writ petitions. Aggrieved by the assessment orders, the petitioner - Society filed Ext.P2 appeal against those assessment orders. Pending these appeals, the Income Tax Officer has issued Ext.P3 notices under Section 221(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 seeking recovery of the amount of assessment.
The learned counsel for the petitioner points out that in an identical case, i.e., W.P. (C) No.13364/2019, this Court has passed orders directing the appellate authority to consider the appeals preferred by the Society first and not to take any coercive steps till the finalisation of the appeal. In judgment in W.A. No.1529/2019, an identical case, a Division Bench of this Court directed the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to consider and dispose of statutory appeals filed by the appellant therein at the earliest 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].
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the Department of Income Tax.
After perusing the pleadings, I feel that these writ petitions also can be disposed of in similar manner. Accordingly, these writ petitions are disposed of directing the 1st respondent - Appellate Authority to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P2 appeals, as expeditiously as possible and it is further directed that further steps of coercive nature shall not be resorted to against the petitioner - Society till the appeals are disposed of. N. NAGARESH, JUDGE aks/22.07.2019
Appendix — schedule of exhibits
More judgments on Section 221(1)
- Ruby Singh, Delhi vs DCIT, CC-8, DelhiITA 3044/DEL/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed31 Aug 2026AY 2019-20
- Ruby Singh, Delhi vs DCIT, CC-8, DelhiITA 3043/DEL/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed31 Aug 2026AY 2018-19
- Ruby Singh, Delhi vs DCIT, CC-8, DelhiITA 3042/DEL/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed31 Aug 2026AY 2016-17
- Kamuben Ramanlal Patel, Daman vs Income Tax Officer, DamanITA 798/SRT/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed10 Aug 2026AY 2017-18
- Bank of Baroda (E-Vijaya Bank), Delhi vs Addl Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 1864/DEL/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed5 Aug 2026AY 2013-14
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Smt Usha W/O Shri Tarun vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Maruti Nandan Minetech Private Limited vs. The Joint CommissionerRajasthan · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Rentex Polymers Private Limited vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Central Goods And Services TaxDelhi · 29 Oct 2026
- Ajay Kumar @ Ajay Sharma vs. Union Of INDIA Rep Thr The Intelligence Officer, Directorate General Of GST Intelligence (Dggi)Jharkhand · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Shila Traders vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 29 Oct 2026
