THE MUNDUR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED, vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court held that the appeal preferred by the petitioner institution is liable to be considered and disposed of on merits before proceeding with the recovery of amounts in terms of the orders passed by the assessment authority. The Court directed the 2nd respondent appellate authority to take up, consider, and pass appropriate orders on Exhibit P2 appeal at the earliest, within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Until orders are passed on the appeal, coercive proceedings on the basis of the original assessment order shall be kept in abeyance. The principle established is that statutory appeals should be heard and decided before recovery actions are initiated, and coercive measures should be stayed pending the appeal's disposal.
What were the facts?
The petitioner, The Mundur Service Co-operative Bank Limited, is a primary credit society that received an assessment order under the Income Tax Act. Aggrieved by this order, the petitioner filed a statutory appeal (Exhibit P2) and a stay petition (Exhibit P3) before the 2nd respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). Despite filing the appeal, the petitioner contends that demands are being raised based on the assessment order. The writ petition was filed before the High Court of Kerala seeking intervention in this matter.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the recovery of amounts based on the assessment order should be proceeded with while a statutory appeal is pending before the appellate authority? The petitioner argued that demands are being raised in terms of the assessment orders even though a statutory appeal has been preferred. The petitioner sought a direction for the appellate authority to consider and dispose of the appeal on merits before any recovery action is taken. The revenue did not record any specific arguments in the judgment.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
JUDGMENT Petitioner is a primary credit society which has been issued with assessment order under the Income Tax Act. Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the petitioner has preferred statutory appeal, Exhibit P2, before the 2nd respondent appellate authority under the Income Tax Act. The petitioner has also preferred Exhibit P3 stay petition in the appeal. However, it is contended that demands are being raised in terms of the assessment orders.
Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents, I am of the opinion that the appeal preferred by the petitioner institution is liable to be considered and disposed of on merits before proceeding with the recovery of amounts in terms of the orders passed by the assessment authority. In the above view of the matter, there will be a direction to the 2nd respondent appellate authority to take up consider and pass appropriate orders on Exhibit P2 appeal preferred by the petitioner and to dispose of the same in accordance with law at the earliest, at any rate, within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till orders are passed on the appeal, as directed above, coercive proceedings on the basis of the original order shall be kept in abeyance. Writ petition is ordered accordingly.
ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE vgs10/5
Appendix — schedule of exhibits
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Shining Steel Through Its Proprietor Kartik Gupta vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Redamancy World Through Its Proprietor Sanjay Kumar Goel vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Arj Exim INDIA vs. Additional Commissioner Of CGST, Appeals-Ii, New Delhi And OrsDelhi · 27 Oct 2026
- The State Of Bihar Through The Commissioner Of State Tax vs. Kaushlendra KumarPatna · 27 Oct 2026
- Ayush Sureshchandra Shah vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 27 Oct 2026
