KALLUMALA AGRICULTURAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. vs. THE ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/16024/2022HC KeralaKLHC01032099202217 May 2022Author: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala, considering the submissions of both parties, opined that the writ petition could be disposed of with a direction. The Court directed the second respondent, the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, to consider and pass orders on the stay petitions (Exts.P5 and P6) within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Until a decision is taken on the stay petitions, all coercive proceedings against the petitioner were ordered to be kept in abeyance. The writ petition was disposed of in terms of this direction. No specific finding was made on the merits of the assessment orders or the appeals.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Kallumala Agricultural Co-operative Bank Ltd., is aggrieved by assessment orders for assessment years 2013-2014 and 2015-2016, marked as Exts.P1 and P2. The petitioner has filed appeals against these orders before the second respondent, the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Exts.P3 and P4). Concurrently, petitions for stay of proceedings pursuant to the assessment orders have been filed (Exts.P5 and P6). The petitioner apprehends coercive recovery actions before their stay petitions are considered, leading to the filing of this writ petition before the High Court of Kerala.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to a direction for the expeditious disposal of their stay petitions filed before the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, and a stay on coercive proceedings pending such disposal? (Question of procedure and relief). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argues that they are facing potential coercive proceedings before their stay petitions are adjudicated and seeks a direction for the timely consideration of these petitions and a stay on recovery actions. The petitioner relies on the general principle of allowing parties to pursue their statutory remedies without prejudice. Revenue's Contention: The judgment records submissions from the counsel for the respondents, indicating their participation in the proceedings. However, specific arguments or reliance on any authorities by the revenue are not detailed in the judgment.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
W.P.C.No.16024/2022 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. TUESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF MAY 2022 / 27TH VAISAKHA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 16024 OF 2022 PETITIONER: KALLUMALA AGRICULTURAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. N.H.W.14, KALLUMALA P.O., MAVELIKKARA, ALAPPUZHA- 690 110, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, BINDU.A. BY ADVS. HARISANKAR V. MENON MEERA V.MENON RESPONDENTS: 1 THE ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME TAX OFFICER NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI-110 001 2 NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, DELHI-110 001, REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17.05.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.C.No.16024/2022 2

JUDGMENT Aggrieved by Exts.P1 and P2 orders of assessment relating to assessment year 2013-2014 and 2015-2016, petitioner has preferred appeals before the 2nd respondent, copy of which are produced as Exts.P3 and P4. Petitions for stay of proceedings pursuant to the assessment orders have also been filed as Exts.P5 and P6. Petitioner apprehends coercive proceedings to be effected even before the petition for stay is considered. Hence this writ petition.

2.

Having considered the submissions of the counsel for the petitioner as well as the respondents, I am of the opinion that this writ petition itself can be disposed of with a direction.

3.

Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Exts.P5 and P6 stay petitions, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till such a decision is taken, all coercive proceedings against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance. The writ petition is disposed of as above. ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. JUDGE DG/17.5.22

W.P.C.No.16024/2022 3

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16024/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2013-14 DATED 29.03.2022 Exhibit P2 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2015-16 DATED 27.03.2022 Exhibit P3 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT 2013-14 DATED 29.04.2022 Exhibit P4 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT 2015-16 DATED 29.04.2022 Exhibit P5 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT 2013-14 DATED 27.04.2022 Exhibit P6 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT 2015-16 DATED 27.04.2022

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →