KERALA KERA KARSHAKA SAHAKARANA FEDERATION LTD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/34353/2022HC KeralaKLHC01073294202228 October 2022Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the 2nd respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)) to consider and pass orders on the stay petition (Ext.P3) after providing the petitioner an opportunity of being heard. Crucially, the Court further directed that pending the consideration of the stay petition, any steps initiated for the recovery of amounts due under the assessment order (Ext.P1) shall be kept in abeyance. The Court did not decide the merits of the appeal itself, focusing solely on the procedural aspect of ensuring no recovery actions are taken while the stay application is under consideration. The principle established is that a taxpayer can seek a stay on recovery proceedings pending the disposal of their appeal, especially when they have a strong arguable case based on precedent.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Kerala Kera Karshaka Sahakarana Federation Ltd., received an order of assessment (Ext.P1) for assessment year 2020-21. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed an appeal (Ext.P2) and a stay petition (Ext.P3) before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the 2nd respondent. The petitioner filed this writ petition apprehending recovery proceedings while the stay petition was pending. The petitioner contended that the issue in appeal is covered by a High Court judgment. The respondents are the Income Tax Officer, Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre, and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the recovery proceedings should be kept in abeyance pending the disposal of the stay petition by the 2nd respondent. Assessee's contentions: The petitioner argued that the issue raised in their appeal is squarely covered in their favour by the judgment of the High Court of Kerala in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax v. Peroorkada Service Cooperative Bank Ltd. [(2022)442 ITR 141]. Revenue's contentions: The judgment records no specific contentions from the respondent Department regarding the stay petition or the merits of the appeal.

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. FRIDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 6TH KARTHIKA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 34353 OF 2022 PETITIONER: KERALA KERA KARSHAKA SAHAKARANA FEDERATION LTD., KERA TOWER, WATER WORKS COMPOUND VELLAYAMBALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM KERALA, INDIA – 695 033, BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, ASHOK R. BY ADVS. ANIL D. NAIR TELMA RAJU P.K.BIJU EDATHARA VINEETA KRISHNAN ANJANA A. RESPONDENTS: 1 INCOME TAX OFFICER, ASSESSMENT UNIT, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NEW DELHI – 110 001. 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, NEW DELHI, PIN – 110 001. ADV. CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM (SC) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28.10.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 34353 OF 2022 2

JUDGMENT The petitioner suffered Ext.P1 order of assessment for assessment year 2020-21 under the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Aggrieved by Ext.P1 order of assessment, the petitioner preferred Ext.P2 appeal along with Ext.P3 application for stay before the 2nd respondent. The petitioner has filed this writ petition apprehending recovery proceedings pending consideration of the stay petition by the 2nd respondent. It is pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the issue raised in the appeal is squarely covered in favour of the petitioner by the judgment of this Court in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax v. Peroorkada Service Cooperative Bank Ltd. [(2022)442 ITR 141].

2.

Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent Department and considering the limited nature of relief sought for in the writ petition, this writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3 stay petition after affording to the petitioner an opportunity of being heard. It is further directed that pending consideration of the stay petition by the 2nd respondent as above, any steps initiated

WP(C) NO. 34353 OF 2022 3 for recovery of amounts due under Ext.P1 shall be kept in abeyance. The writ petition will stand disposed of as above. GOPINATH P. JUDGE DK

WP(C) NO. 34353 OF 2022 4

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 34353/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 17.09.2022 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2020-21 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 5.10.2022 ALONG WITH ACKNOWLEDGMENT FOR FILING OF THE SAME Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER FOR THE A.Y. 2020-21

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →