THE TATTAMANGALAM SERVICE,, vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,

WP(C)/8145/2019HC KeralaKLHC01020718201919 March 2019Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE3 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the second respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), to consider the stay application (Ext.P3) filed by the petitioner within two months. Pending the disposal of the stay application, recovery proceedings pursuant to the impugned assessment order were ordered to be kept in abeyance. The writ petition was disposed of with these directions. The court did not decide on the merits of the assessment order or the stay application itself, but rather on the procedural aspect of its timely consideration. The ratio is that appellate authorities should consider stay applications expeditiously, and courts can direct such consideration while staying recovery proceedings.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, The Tattamangalam Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., filed an appeal against an assessment order (Ext.P1) passed under the Income Tax Act. The appeal was filed before the second respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). Along with the appeal, the petitioner also filed a stay application (Ext.P3) seeking to halt recovery proceedings. The writ petition was filed before the High Court of Kerala challenging the assessment order and seeking directions regarding the stay application.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should direct the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to consider the stay application filed by the petitioner within a specified period? (Question of procedure) Assessee's Contention: The assessee sought a direction from the High Court to expedite the consideration of their stay application by the appellate authority. No specific authorities or precedents were mentioned in the provided text. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, represented by the Standing Counsel, did not record any specific arguments against the direction sought by the assessee in the provided text. The focus was on the procedural aspect of the stay application.

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 A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE TUESDAY ,THE 19TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1940 WP(C).No. 8145 of 2019 PETITIONER/S: THE TATTAMANGALAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.P 502, TATTAMANGALAM, PALAKKAD- 678012, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY-IN-CHARGE, GRACY.R. AGED 57, D/O.RAJAN.A.V. BY ADVS. SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON SMT.MEERA V.MENON RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 5, AYAKAR BHAVAN, PALAKKAD- 678014. 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), SAKTHAN NAGAR, THRISSUR- 680021. BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, STANDING COUNSEL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19.03.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.8145/2019 2

JUDGMENT The petitioner,

as against

Ext.P1 assessment order under the Income Tax Act, filed Ext.P2 appeal before the second respondent. The petitioner also filed Ext.P3 stay application. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be a direction to the second respondent to consider 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 of as above. A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE JUDGE ln

WP(C).No.8145/2019 3 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2016-17 DATED 27.12.2018. EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2016-17 DATED 16.01.2019. EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2016-17 DATED 15.01.2019. RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:NIL. //// P.A.TO JUDGE

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →