NAVAIKULAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO.964 vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,

WP(C)/28422/2022HC KeralaKLHC01060110202201 September 2022Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.6 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the 3rd respondent, the National Faceless Appeals Centre, to provide a link to enable the petitioner to upload their stay petition within ten days of receiving a certified copy of the judgment. If the petitioner files a stay petition within ten days of the link being provided, all coercive steps, including the ongoing garnishee proceedings, will be kept in abeyance until the National Faceless Appeals Centre decides on the stay petition. The stay petition must be decided after affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing. The Court did not decide on the merits of the assessment or the appeal itself, focusing solely on the procedural aspect of allowing the petitioner to file a stay petition.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Navaikulam Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala challenging garnishee proceedings initiated by the Income Tax Department. These proceedings were to recover dues assessed under an order (Ext.P3). The petitioner argued that garnishee proceedings should not have been initiated while their appeal (Ext.P5) was pending before the first appellate authority. The respondent Department contended that the assessment order was based on unexplained cash deposits and that the petitioner was not entitled to deduction under Section 80(P) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. They also noted that the petitioner had not filed a stay petition along with their appeal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether garnishee proceedings can be initiated to recover assessed dues while an appeal against the assessment order is pending before the first appellate authority, and if so, under what circumstances? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that garnishee proceedings should not have been initiated while their appeal was pending before the first appellate authority. The specific provision of law or precedent relied upon by the petitioner is not explicitly recorded in the judgment. Revenue's Contention: The respondent Department argued that the assessment order was issued considering unexplained cash deposits and that the petitioner was not eligible for deduction under Section 80(P) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. They further submitted that the petitioner had not filed a stay petition in their appeal, and therefore, the initiation of recovery proceedings was not illegal. The Department relied on the fact that the assessment order was valid and that no stay was sought by the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80(P)

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 GOPINATH P. THURSDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022 / 10 TH BHADRA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 28422 OF 2022 PETITIONER: NAVAIKULAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO.964 NAVAIKULAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED, NO.964, NAVAIKULAM P O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN- 695603 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY BINDU S, PIN - 695603 BY ADV C.A.JOJO RESPONDENTS: 1 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), KOWDIAR, TRIVANDRUM-695003 , PIN - 695003 2 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-1 OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), TRIVANDRUM-695003 , PIN - 695003 3 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( APPEALS) NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110001. , PIN - 110001 4 INCOME TAX OFFICER, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110001. , PIN - 110001 5 BRANCH MANAGER ICICI BANK, KALLAMBALAM BRANCH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695605, PIN - 695605 6 THE KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD (EARSTWHILE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK) KALLAMBALAM BRANCH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695605 REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, PIN - 695605 7 KERALA GRAMIN BANK LTD KALLAMBALAM BRANCH, KALATHOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695605 REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, PIN - 695605 BY ADVS. CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM PRADEESH CHACKO SRI.THOMAS ABRAHAM, SC, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT CO.OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED WPC No.28422 of 2022 2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.09.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC No.28422 of 2022 3 JUDGMENT Dated this the 01st day of September, 2022 The petitioner has approached this Court being aggrieved by the fact that Garnishee proceedings have been initiated in respect of the accounts maintained by the petitioner in the 5th respondent Bank, in order to recover dues assessed in respect of Ext.P3 assessment order. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner has already moved to the first appellate authority by filing Ext.P5 appeal and while the appeal is pending Garnishee proceedings ought not to have been initiated by the respondent Department. 2. Heard Adv. Christopher Abraham for the Income Tax Department, Adv. Pratheesh Chacko appearing for the ICICI Bank and Adv. Thomas Abraham appearing for the Kerala Bank. 3. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Department points out that the WPC No.28422 of 2022 4 assessment order in question has been issued taking into consideration the fact that there was several unexplained cash deposits and this is not a case where the petitioner Society was entitled for deduction under Section 80 (P) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. It is submitted that the petitioner did not even file a stay petition in Ext.P5 appeal and there is absolutely no illegality whatsoever in a proceedings initiated by the respondent Department. 4. Having heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the respondent Department, I am of the view that the writ petition can be disposed of directing the 3rd respondent, National Faceless Appeals Centre to provide a link to enable the petitioner to upload the stay petition in Ext.P5 appeal. It shall be done within a period of ten days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the judgment. If the petitioner files a stay petition within a period of ten days from the date of which the link is so provided to the petitioner, all coercive steps WPC No.28422 of 2022 5 including the Garnishee proceedings now initiated shall be kept in abeyance, till the decision is taken by the National Faceless Appeals Centre on the stay petition to be field by the petitioner. The stay petition shall be decided after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- GOPINATH P. JUDGE SKP/01-09 WPC No.28422 of 2022 6 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 28422/2022 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 EXHIBIT-P1: A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP ( C) NO. 33382/2019 FOR AY 2014-15 AND 2015-16 DATED 06.12.2019 EXHIBIT P2 EXHIBIT P2:. A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP ( C) NO. 13851/2019 FOR AY 2016-17 DATED 17.05.2019 EXHIBIT P3

FOR AY 2017-18 DATED 29.12.2019 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P4 EXHIBIT P4. AOF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 29.12.2017 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P5 EXHIBIT P5. AOF THE APPEAL BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR AY 2017-18 DATED 27.01.2020 EXHIBIT6 EXHIBIT P6. AOF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR AY 2018-19 DATED 08.04.2021 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P7 EXHIBIT P7. AOF THE NOTICE U/S 226(3) DATED 26.08.2022 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT8 EXHIBIT P8. AOF THE NOTICES U/S 226(3) DATED 10.08.2022 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NILP.A.TO JUDGE

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →