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

WP(C)/9917/2019HC KeralaKLHC01025015201930 May 2019Author: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI4 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala, in disposing of the writ petition, directed the third respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), to consider and dispose of the stay petition (Ext.P11) as expeditiously as possible, preferably within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Furthermore, the Court ordered a stay on recovery proceedings pursuant to the orders under appeal before the third respondent, effective for two months from the date of the judgment. The principle established is that courts can direct quasi-judicial authorities to dispose of pending stay applications within a stipulated timeframe, and can grant a temporary stay of recovery proceedings pending such disposal.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Anjarakandy Farmers Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The petition was similar in prayer to another writ petition, W.P.(C) No. 9902 of 2019, which had been disposed of by the Court on April 11, 2019. The respondents are the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Kannur Range; the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax; and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The writ petition challenges an order or action by the revenue authorities, specifically concerning an appeal pending before the third respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)). The amount in dispute is not specified. The procedural history involves a stay petition (Ext.P11) filed by the petitioner before the third respondent.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the third respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)) should consider and dispose of the stay petition (Ext.P11) expeditiously? (Question of procedure) Assessee's Contention: The petitioner seeks a direction for the expeditious disposal of their stay petition. They rely on the precedent set by the disposal of W.P.(C) No. 9902 of 2019, which had a similar prayer. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, represented by the Standing Counsel, does not appear to have raised any specific contention against the prayer for expeditious disposal of the stay petition. The judgment does not record any argument from the revenue on this point.

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 S.V.BHATTI THURSDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF MAY 2019 / 9TH JYAISHTA, 1941 WP(C).No. 9917 of 2019 PETITIONER/S: ANJARAKANDY FARMERS SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., MAMBA P.O., KANNUR - 670 611, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR ANIL KUMAR M.P. BY ADVS. SRI.S.ARUN RAJ SMT.C.T.SUJA RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, KANNUR RANGE, KANNUR - 670 006. 2 THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, NORTH BLOCK, MANANCHIRA, KOZHIKODE - 673 001. 3 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), AAYAKAR BHAVAM, MANANCHIRA, KOZHIKODE - 673 001. BY ADV. SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30.05.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) No.9917/2019 -2-

J U D G M E N T Sri Arun Raj, counsel for the petitioner, and Sri Christopher Abraham, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents submit that the prayer in the instant writ petition is similar to the prayer in W.P.(C) No.9902 of 2019 which was disposed of by this Court on 11.04.2019. 2. The statement placed on record. The writ petition is disposed of directing the third respondent to consider and dispose of Ext.P11 stay petition as expeditiously as possible, preferably within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

The recovery proceedings pursuant to the orders under appeal before the third respondent are stayed for two months from today. S.V.BHATTI JUDGE jjj -3- APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDERS DATED 6/1/2016 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE ACT FOR THE AY 2013-14. EXHIBIT P2OF THE FIRST APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2013-14. EXHIBIT P3OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 20/12/2016 PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) FOR THE AY 2014-15. EXHIBIT P4OF THE FIRST APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2014-15. EXHIBIT P5OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 19/12/2017 PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) FOR THE AY 2015-16. EXHIBIT P6OF THE FIRST APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2015-16. EXHIBIT P7OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 18/12/2018 PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) FOR THE AY 2016-17. EXHIBIT P8OF THE FIRST APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2016-17. EXHIBIT P9OF THE APPLICATION OF STAY FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE AY'S 2013-14, 2014-2015, 2015-16 AND 2016-17. -4- EXHIBIT P10OF THE ORDER DATED 27/3/2019 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT, PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOZHIKODE FOR THE AY'S 2013-14, 2014- 15 2014-15 AND 2016-17. EXHIBIT P11OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE AY'S 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 AND 2016-17

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →