OCHANTHURUTH SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/42359/2022HC KeralaKLHC01091906202223 December 2022Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.4 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition by directing that any recovery steps for amounts due under the assessment order (Ext.P1), as confirmed by the first appellate authority (Ext.P2), shall be kept in abeyance. This stay is effective until the ITAT passes orders on the petitioner's stay application (Ext.P4). The Tribunal is directed to endeavor to pass orders on the stay application within three months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this judgment. The Court did not decide on the merits of the appeal or the stay application itself, but rather on the procedural aspect of keeping recovery in abeyance pending the Tribunal's decision. The principle is that recovery can be deferred pending adjudication of a stay application before the appellate tribunal.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Ochanthuruth Service Co-operative Bank, is challenging an assessment order for the assessment year 2017-18. This order was confirmed by the appellate authority. The petitioner filed a second appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) and also filed an application for a stay on recovery proceedings. The present writ petition was filed seeking a direction to keep recovery proceedings in abeyance until the ITAT considers the stay application. The Income Tax Department had no objection to this direction.

What were the issues?

1. Whether recovery proceedings for amounts due under the assessment order (Ext.P1) and confirmed by the first appellate authority (Ext.P2) should be kept in abeyance until the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) considers the petitioner's stay application (Ext.P4)? (Question of procedure/mixed law and fact) Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that recovery proceedings should be stayed until the ITAT decides on their stay application. No specific legal provisions or precedents were cited. Revenue's Contention: The respondent department stated they had no objection to the direction being issued.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. FRIDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 2ND POUSHA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 42359 OF 2022 PETITIONER: 1 OCHANTHURUTH SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK OCHANTHURUTH, COCHIN, ERNAKULAM - PIN - 682508 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY SMT. SINDHU M. BY ADVS. AJI V.DEV ALAN PRIYADARSHI DEV S.SAJEEVAN RESPONDENTS: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER NON CORP WARD 2(5), INCOME TAX OFFICE, L.G. TOWERS, THOPPUMPADY, ERNAKULAM -, PIN - 682005 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE (NFAC), DELHI, PIN - 110001 REPRESENTED BT THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER, 3 THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, COCHIN BENCH, KENDRIYA BHAVAN, KAKKANAD - PIN - 682037 REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR BY ADVS. SRI CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, KERALA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23.12.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT Dated this the 23rd day of December, 2022 The petitioner suffered Ext.P1 order of assessment for the assessment year 2017-18 under the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1962. The said order has been confirmed by the Appellate Authority through Ext.P2 order prompting the petitioner to file a second appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal along with application for stay.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that till the Tribunal considers the application for stay, any proceedings for recovery of amounts due in Ext.P1 order of assessment as confirmed by Ext.P2 order of the First Appellate Authority may be kept in abeyance.

Learned counsel for the respondent Department has no objection in such a direction being issued.

Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of directing that any steps for recovery of amounts due under Ext.P1 order of assessment as confirmed by Ext.P2 order of the First Appellate Authority shall be kept in abeyance till orders are passed on Ext.P4 stay application by 3rd respondent Tribunal. The Tribunal shall endeavour to pass orders on Ext.P4 stay application within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. GOPINATH P. JUDGE SKP/23-12

Appendix — schedule of exhibits

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 42359/2022 PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2017-18 DATED 30- 12-2019 EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 25.11.2022 EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE STATUTORY APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER AGAINST EXT.P.2 ORDER BEFORE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 07.12.2022 EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED: 07.12.2022 RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:NIL TRUE COPY P.A.TO JUDGE

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →