THE MANICKAL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.1910 vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/13366/2019HC KeralaKLHC01033268201910 May 2019Author: HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN5 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

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 P9 appeal filed by the petitioner and dispose of the same in accordance with law 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 based on the original assessment order shall be kept in abeyance. No issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, The Manickal Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., a primary credit society, received an assessment order under the Income Tax Act. Aggrieved, it filed a statutory appeal (Exhibit P9) and a stay petition (Exhibit P10) before the 2nd respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). Despite the pending appeal and stay petition, demands were being raised based on the assessment order. The petitioner approached the High Court of Kerala by way of a writ petition seeking directions regarding its pending appeal and the recovery proceedings.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appellate authority should consider and dispose of the statutory appeal preferred by the petitioner before recovery proceedings are initiated based on the assessment order. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner contended that demands were being raised in terms of the assessment orders despite the pendency of its statutory appeal and stay petition before the appellate authority. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the revenue's side regarding the issues raised by the petitioner.

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 MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN FRIDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF MAY 2019 / 20TH VAISAKHA, 1941 WP(C).No. 13366 of 2019 PETITIONER: THE MANICKAL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.1910 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PIRAPPANCODE.P.O,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT- 695607. BY ADVS. SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR SRI.ARJUN RAGHAVAN RESPONDENTS: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2(3),OFFICE OF THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,RANGE-2, 1ST FLOOR,AYAKAR BHAVAN,KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695003. 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS), AAYAKAR BHAVAN,KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695003. OTHER PRESENT: SRI JOSE JOSEPH - STANDING COUNSEL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10.05.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).No.13366/19 2

JUDGMENT 1.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 P9, before the 2nd respondent appellate authority under the Income Tax Act. The petitioner has also preferred Exhibit P10 stay petition in the appeal. However, it is contended that demands are being raised in terms of the assessment orders. 2.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. 3.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 P9 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 sj

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 05.12.2018,ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES(GENERAL),NEDUMANGADU. EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 23.02.2018 IN WP(C)NO.6093 OF 2018 EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 02.08.2018 IN W.A.NO.1415/2018. EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE RECTIFICATION ORDER UNDER SECTION 154 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 18.01.2019. EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE ONLINE APPEAL DATED 29/01/2019 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 10/02/2019 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE RECTIFICATION ORDER UNDER SECTION 154 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT,ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 09.03.2019. EXHIBIT P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 26.04.2019 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P9 A TRUE COY OF THE ONLINE APPEAL DATED 27.04.2019 FILED AGAINST EXHIBIT-P7 ORDER. EXHIBIT P10 A TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 01.05.2019 FILED IN EXHIBIT-P90 APPEAL BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. W.P.(C).No.13366/19 5 EXHIBIT P11 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 21.02.2019 IN WP(C)NO.5070 OF 2019. True copy PS to Judge

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →