THE MANNARKKAD TALUK CO-OP. EMPLOYEES CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. NO. P 629 vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/20689/2020HC KeralaKLHC01051589202005 October 2020Author: HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN4 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala directed the 3rd respondent (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) to take up, consider, and pass appropriate orders on the petitioner's appeal (Ext.P3) after hearing the parties, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. The Court also ordered that coercive proceedings pursuant to the assessment order (Ext.P1) shall be kept in abeyance until the disposal of the appeal. The primary finding was that the ITAT should expedite the disposal of the pending appeal and stay petition. The ratio is that when an appeal and stay petition are pending before the ITAT, and recovery proceedings are initiated prematurely, the High Court can direct the ITAT to dispose of the matters expeditiously and stay coercive actions.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Mannarkkad Taluk Co-op. Employees Co-operative Society Ltd, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala seeking a direction to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) to dispose of its appeal and stay petition. The petitioner had filed an appeal against an order of assessment (Ext.P1) and a stay petition (Ext.P4) before the ITAT (3rd respondent). The petitioner contended that recovery steps were being taken based on the assessment order without considering the pending appeal and stay application. The respondents, represented by the Standing Counsel, submitted that the appeal would be considered and disposed of without delay.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal should be directed to dispose of the appeal and stay petition filed by the assessee? (Question of procedure/mandamus) Assessee's Contentions: - The petitioner argued that hasty steps were being taken for recovery of amounts based on the assessment order (Ext.P1) without considering the pending appeal (Ext.P3) and stay petition (Ext.P4) before the ITAT. Revenue's Contentions: - The learned Standing Counsel for the respondents submitted that the appeal preferred by the petitioner would be considered and disposed of without delay.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN MONDAY, THE 05TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2020 / 13TH ASWINA, 1942 WP(C).No.20689 OF 2020(I) PETITIONER: THE MANNARKKAD TALUK CO-OP. EMPLOYEES CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD NO. P 629, MANNARKKAD, PALAKKAD 678 582, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, P.K. MOHANDAS. BY ADVS. SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON SMT.MEERA V.MENON RESPONDENTS: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 4, AYAKAR BHAVAN, PALAKKAD 678 014. 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (APPEALS), THRISSUR 680 021. 3 THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AYAKAR BHAVAN, KAKKANADU, KOCHI 682 030, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR. THUSHARA V JAMES GP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.10.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No.20689 OF 2020(I) 2 JUDGMENT Dated this the 5th day of October 2020 This writ petition is filed seeking the following prayer: “To direct the 3rd respondent to dispose of Ext.P3 appeal and Ext.P4 stay petition by the issue of a writ of mandamus or such other writ or order or direction.”

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

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that as against Ext.P1 order of assessment, the petitioner has submitted Ext.P3 appeal and Ext.P4 stay petition before the 3rd respondent. It is submitted that hasty steps are being taken for recovery of amounts on the basis of Ext.P1, without considering the appeal or the application for stay.

The learned Standing Counsel submits that the appeal preferred by the petitioner will be considered and disposed of without delay. There will, accordingly, be a direction to the 3rd respondent to take up, consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P3 appeal, after

WP(C).No.20689 OF 2020(I) 3 hearing the parties, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Coercive proceedings pursuant to Ext.P1 shall be kept in abeyance till then. This writ petition is ordered accordingly. ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE SVP

WP(C).No.20689 OF 2020(I) 4

Appendix — schedule of exhibits

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2016-17 DATED 28.12.2018. EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF APPELLATE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2016-17 DATED 15.9.2020. EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2016-17 DATED 26.09.2020. EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 26.09.2020.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →