PALODE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD. vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP(C)/6252/2019HC KeralaKLHC01016298201901 March 2019Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU3 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the petitioner had exercised their statutory remedy of filing an appeal in a timely manner and had also filed a stay petition. The Court reckoned that procedural fairness demands that the revenue authorities should wait before taking further steps until the appellate authority decides on the stay petition. Therefore, the writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the respondent authority to defer coercive steps until the 2nd respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)) considers the stay petition. The Court also expressed hope that the 2nd respondent would dispose of the stay petition expeditiously. No specific finding was made on the merits of the assessment order or the stay petition itself.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, M/s Palode Co-operative Agricultural Development Bank Ltd., an assessee under the Income Tax Act, 1961, filed an appeal against an assessment order passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (1st respondent) before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (2nd respondent). The petitioner also filed a stay petition along with the appeal. The grievance of the petitioner was that coercive steps were being taken by the revenue authorities before the appellate authority could decide on the stay petition. This writ petition was filed to address this grievance.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the revenue authorities can initiate coercive steps against the assessee while a stay petition is pending before the appellate authority? (Question of procedure and fairness) The petitioner argued that procedural fairness dictates that coercive steps should be deferred until the appellate authority has had an opportunity to decide on the stay petition. The revenue's contentions were not recorded 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 DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU FRIDAY ,THE 01ST DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 10TH PHALGUNA, 1940 WP(C).No. 6252 of 2019 PETITIONER: M/S PALODE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD. NO.T-862, KUSAVOOR, KARIMANCODE PALODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 562, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, SHRI. R. VAIJUKUMAR. BY ADVS. SRI.T.M.SREEDHARAN SRI.V.P.NARAYANAN SMT.DIVYA RAVINDRAN SRI.R.BHASKARA KRISHNAN RESPONDENTS: 1 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), AYAKKAR BHAWAN, KOWDIAR P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 005 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AAYAKAR BHAWAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 005 BY STANDING COUNSEL SRI. CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.03.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2 WP(C).No. 6252 of 2019

JUDGMENT The petitioner, an assessee under the Income Tax Act, 1961 on the rolls of the 1st respondent, questioned the Ext.P1 assessment order, before the 2nd respondent. The petitioner has also filed a stay petition in the appeal. Ventilating his grievance that the authorities are taking coercive steps before the appellate authority could consider the stay petition, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel.

I reckon the petitioner has exercised on time his statutory remedy of filing an appeal. It appears that he has also filed a stay petition. Procedural fairness demands that the authorities may wait, before taking further steps, until the appellate authority decides on the stay petition.

Therefore, I dispose of the writ petition directing the respondent authority to defer coercive steps until the 2nd respondent considers the stay petition. I also hope that the 2nd respondent will dispose of the stay petition expeditiously. DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU JUDGE SKA

3 WP(C).No. 6252 of 2019

Appendix — schedule of exhibits

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 28.12.2018 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR AY-2016-17 EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 28.01.2019 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 25.01.2019 FILED BY THE PETITONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION DATED 25.01.2019 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT U/S 220(6) EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 11.05.2018 IN I.T.A. NO. 314/EF/TVM/CIT(A)/TVM/2017-18, DATED 11.05.2018 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →