THE MAYYANAD REGIONAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. vs. THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE AUTHORITY

WP(C)/9449/2019HC KeralaKLHC01023669201927 March 2019Author: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI4 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the 1st respondent (Income Tax Appellate Authority) to consider and dispose of the stay petition (Ext.P4) within four weeks from the date of the order. The Court also granted a stay of further steps pursuant to the Assessment Order under appeal before the 1st respondent, pending disposal of the stay petition. However, the Court clarified that this interim order was not granted after considering the merits of the matter and that the 1st respondent was to consider the prayer in accordance with law and pass orders on its merits. No specific issues regarding the assessment itself were decided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, The Mayyanad Regional Co-operative Bank Ltd., filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus to declare Ext.P5 as illegal. The petitioner had filed an appeal against an Assessment Order dated December 26, 2018 (Ext.P3) and a stay petition (Ext.P4) before the Income Tax Appellate Authority (the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)). The petitioner's counsel requested that the 1st respondent be directed to consider and dispose of the stay petition expeditiously, preferably within two weeks. The learned Standing Counsel for the respondents did not oppose this prayer. The High Court directed the 1st respondent to consider and dispose of the stay petition within four weeks from the date of the order.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to a direction for expeditious disposal of their stay petition (Ext.P4) before the Income Tax Appellate Authority? (Question of procedure) Assessee's Contention: The petitioner contended that they are satisfied if the 1st respondent (Income Tax Appellate Authority) is directed to consider and dispose of Ext.P4 (stay petition) expeditiously, preferably within two weeks. Revenue's Contention: The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents did not oppose the prayer for disposing of Ext.P4 stay petition and to furnish an order.

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 WEDNESDAY,THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 6TH CHAITHRA, 1941 WP(C).No. 9449 of 2019 PETITIONER: THE MAYYANAD REGIONAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. MAYYANAD BANK BUILDING, MAYYANAD, KOLLAM-691 302, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE. BY ADVS. SRI.V.JAYAPRADEEP SMT.ANN SUSAN GEORGE SMT.O.A.NURIYA SRI.ALAN PRIYADARSHI DEV SRI.D.S.LOKANATHAN RESPONDENTS: 1 THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE AUTHORITY (THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2 INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD NO.4, KOLLAM-691 001 SC SRI. CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27.03.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: -2- WP(C).No. 9449 of 2019

JUDGMENT Heard Sri. Jayapradeep. V, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Christopher Abraham, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents.

The petitioner prays for mandamus declaring Ext.P5 as illegal etc. The petitioner has filed appeal against the Assessment Order dated 26.12.2018 in Ext.P3 and stay petition in Ext.P4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is satisfied if the 1st respondent is directed to consider and dispose of Ext.P4 expeditiously preferably within two weeks.

The learned Standing Counsel does not oppose the prayer for disposing of Ext.P4 stay petition and to furnish order. Hence the 1st respondent considers and disposes of Ext.P4 stay petition within four weeks from today. In the interregnum there shall be stay of further steps if any pursuant

-3- to the Assessment under appeal before the 1st respondent. The interim order now granted by this Court shall not be understood as one granted after considering the merits of the matter. It is for the 1st respondent to consider the prayer in accordance with law and pass orders on its merits. S.V.BHATTI JUDGE JS

-4-

Appendix — schedule of exhibits

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE REGISTRAR, CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES DATED 12.2.1957 EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 26.12.2018 FOR THE YEAR 2016-17 EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF THE PRINT -OUTS OF THE APPEAL PREFERRED ONLINE DATED 17.01.2019 EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 15.01.2019 EXHIBIT P5 COPY OF THE RECOVERY ORDER DATED 11.02.2019, SERVED ON 13.02.2019 EXHIBIT P6 COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 05.03.2019 OF R1 EXHIBIT P7 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C0.5144/2019 DATED 20.02.2019

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →