MANGALAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED,D vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,

WP(C)/9936/2019HC KeralaKLHC01024985201929 March 2019Author: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI3 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the second respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), to consider and dispose of the stay petitions (Exts.P6 and P8) as expeditiously as possible, preferably within three months. The appeals (Exts.P5 and P7) were directed to be disposed of within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Additionally, recovery proceedings pursuant to the orders under appeal were stayed for three months from the date of the judgment. The reasoning was based on the circumstances of the case, implying a need for timely resolution of tax disputes. No specific issue was left undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Mangalam Service Co-operative Bank Limited, represented by its Secretary, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The petition sought a direction for the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to expeditiously consider and dispose of pending appeals and stay petitions. The appeals were filed against orders passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Tirur. The amount in dispute is not specified. The procedural history involves the filing of appeals and stay petitions before the second respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)) which remained undecided.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should direct the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to expeditiously consider and dispose of pending appeals and stay petitions filed by the assessee? (Question of procedure). The assessee argued for an expeditious disposal of their appeals and stay petitions, highlighting the delay in adjudication. 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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI FRIDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 8TH CHAITHRA, 1941 WP(C).No. 9936 of 2019 PETITIONER/S: MANGALAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED,D NO.9701, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY ABDUL MAJEED V.M., AGED 53 YEARS, S/O.BAPPUTTY, MANGALAM.P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-676561. BY ADVS. SRI.C.A.JOJO SRI.JACOB CHACKO SRI.MATHEWS JOSEPH RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, TIRUR TOWN HALL ROAD, TIRUR-676101. 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MANANCHIRA, KOZHIKODE-673001. 3 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, C.R.BLDG., I S PRESS ROAD, KOCHI, PIN-682018. 4 THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), MANANCHIRA, KOZHIKODE-673001. 5 THE DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK MALAPPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER, MALAPPURAM POST, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. SC SRI. CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29.03.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 9936 of 2019 2

JUDGMENT Heard Sri.C.A.Jojo, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Christopher Abraham, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

The petitioner prays for a direction to the second respondent to consider and dispose of Exts.P6 and P8 stay petitions and Exts.P5 and P7 appeals expeditiously.

Having regard to the circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of directing the second respondent to consider and dispose of Exts.P6 and P8 stay petitions as expeditiously as possible, preferably within three months and Exts.P5 and P7 appeals within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Recovery proceedings pursuant to the orders under appeal before the second respondent are stayed for three months from today. S.V.BHATTI JUDGE Ac

WP(C).No. 9936 of 2019 3 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR A7 2015016 DATED 22.12.2017 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2OF THE DEMAND NOTICE FOR RS.14,82,605/- DATED 22.12.2017 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR AY 2016-17 DATED 18.12.2018 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4OF THE DEMAND NOTICE FOR RS.13,18,857/- DATED 18.12.2018 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P5OF THE APPEAL FOR AY 2015-16 DATED 21.1.2018 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P6OF THE STAY PETITION FOR AY 2015-16 DATED 19.2.2018 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P7OF THE APPEAL FOR AY 2016-17 DATED 16.1.2019 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P8OF THE STAY PETITION FOR AY 2016-17 DATED 22.1.2019 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P9OF THE NOTICE DATED 14.2.2019 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P10OF THE PAYMENT RECEIPT DATED 16.3.2019 FOR AY 2015-16. EXHIBIT P11OF THE PAYMENT RECEIPT DATED 16.3.2019 FOR AY 2016-17. EXHIBIT P12OF THE NOTICE UNDER 226(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT DATED 28.3.2019 TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS: NIL //// PA TO JUDGE

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →