THE ALANALLUR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court directed the second respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), to decide the stay application (Ext.P3) within a period of two months. Pending the decision on the stay application, the Court ordered that recovery proceedings initiated pursuant to the impugned assessment order (Ext.P1) shall be kept in abeyance. The writ petition was disposed of with these directions. The Court did not decide the merits of the appeal or the assessment order itself, focusing solely on the procedural aspect of the stay application.
What were the facts?
The petitioner, The Alanallur Service Co-operative Bank Ltd, challenged an assessment order issued under the Income Tax Act. To contest this order, the petitioner filed an appeal before the second respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). Along with the appeal, the petitioner also submitted a stay application. The present writ petition was filed seeking a direction for the expeditious disposal of the stay application.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the second respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)) should be directed to decide the stay application filed by the petitioner. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner bank sought a direction for the second respondent to consider and decide its stay application (Ext.P3) filed along with its appeal against the assessment order (Ext.P1). The petitioner implicitly argued for a stay of recovery proceedings pending the decision on the appeal. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the revenue's side regarding the stay application or the writ petition.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
JUDGMENT The petitioner, impugning Ext.P1 assessment order under the Income Tax Act, filed Ext.P2 appeal before the 2nd respondent. The petitioner also filed Ext.P3 stay application. In view of the above, there shall be a direction to the 2nd respondent to take a decision on Ext.P3 stay application within two months. Till then, recovery proceedings pursuant to the impugned order in the appeal shall be kept in abeyance. The Writ Petition is disposed as above. A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE Dxy JUDGE
WP(C).No. 8313 of 2019 3 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2016-17 EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2016-17 EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2016-17
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sureshchandra Moolchand Shah vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Larsen And Toubro Limited vs. Joint Commissioner Of Central GST And Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- T C Global INDIA Private Limited vs. Principal Commissioner Of Central GST, North DelhiDelhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Kamlasana Impex Private Limited vs. Director General Of GST Intelligence (Hq) Delhi) & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Ritu Gautam Proprietor Of Ms Heritage International vs. Additional Commissioner Central Goods And Services Tax Appeals Ii Delhi & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026