ALOOR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK NO.693 vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court directed the second respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), to consider and dispose of the stay petition filed by the petitioner (Ext.P3) as expeditiously as possible, preferably within two months from the date of the order. Additionally, the Court ordered a stay on recovery proceedings pursuant to the orders under appeal before the second respondent for a period of two months from the date of the order. The court did not decide on the merits of the appeal or the stay petition itself, but rather on the procedural aspect of timely disposal and interim relief during the pendency of the stay petition.
What were the facts?
The petitioner, Aloor Service Co-operative Bank No. 693, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala seeking a direction to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to expeditiously consider and dispose of its stay petition. The appeal is pending before the second respondent (CIT(A)). The petitioner is represented by its Secretary. The respondents are the Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The writ petition was filed on April 4, 2019.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the High Court should direct the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to expeditiously consider and dispose of the stay petition filed by the petitioner? (Question of procedure/discretion). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner bank seeks a direction for the expeditious disposal of its stay petition by the second respondent (CIT(A)). Revenue's Contention: The judgment records no specific contention from the revenue regarding the direction for expeditious disposal.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
JUDGMENT Heard Sri. Arun Raj S., the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Jose Joseph, the learned Standing Counsel.
The petitioner prays for a direction to the second respondent to consider and dispose of Ext.P3 stay petition expeditiously.
Having regard to the circumstances of the case the writ petition is disposed of directing the second respondent to consider and dispose of Ext.P3 stay petition as expeditiously as possible, preferably within two months from today. In the meantime the recovery proceedings pursuant to the orders under appeal before the second respondent are stayed for two months from today. S.V.BHATTI JUDGE JS
-3- WP(C).No. 10592 of 2019 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 23.12.2018 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT AND THE DEMAND NOTICE FOR THE AY 2016- 17 EXHIBIT P2OF THE STATUTORY FIRST APPEAL FIELD BY THE PETITIONER SOCIETY BEFORE THE SECOND RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2016-
EXHIBIT P3OF THE STAY PETITIONER FIELD BY THE PETITIONER SOCIETY BEFORE THE SECOND RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2016-17.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Maa Shila Traders vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Ashish Enterprises vs. Assistant Commissioner Gsto Ward No. 86Delhi · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Om.S.R. Construction, Through Its Proprietor Mr. Kuldeep Sharma vs. The State Of Jharkhand Through Its Commissioner, Commerical Tax DepartmentJharkhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Bhanwal Trading And Company vs. The Union Of INDIARajasthan · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Saraswati Enterprises vs. State Of RajasthanRajasthan · 28 Oct 2026