THE THRISSUR DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court of Kerala disposed of the writ petition by issuing a direction to the first respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), to consider and pass orders on the pending stay petition (Ext.P4) within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Until such orders are passed, coercive proceedings pursuant to the assessment order (Ext.P1) were to be kept in abeyance. The court did not decide on the merits of the assessment order or the appeal itself, but rather focused on expediting the decision on the interim relief sought by the petitioner. The principle established is that when an interim relief application is pending before an appellate authority, a High Court may direct the authority to dispose of it within a stipulated time, while keeping coercive steps in abeyance.
What were the facts?
The petitioner, The Thrissur District Co-operative Bank Limited (now The Kerala State Co-operative Bank Ltd.), filed a writ petition challenging an assessment order dated December 30, 2021, issued under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2018-2019. The petitioner had filed an appeal against this assessment order before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who is the first respondent. Concurrently, a petition for stay of proceedings pursuant to the assessment order was also filed and was pending. The writ petition was filed seeking a direction for the disposal of the pending stay petition.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the writ petition is maintainable when an appeal and a stay petition are pending before the appellate authority? Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that since the stay petition was pending before the first respondent, the writ petition could be disposed of with a direction. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the revenue regarding the maintainability of the writ petition or the issues raised by the assessee. The revenue was represented, but their arguments are not detailed in the provided text.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
JUDGMENT Challenging Ext.P1 assessment order, issued under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax, 1961, relating to assessment year 2018-2019, petitioner has preferred Ext.P3 appeal before the 1st respondent. Petition for stay of proceedings pursuant to the assessment order has also been filed as Ext.P4 and the same is pending consideration. Since the stay petition is pending consideration before the 1st respondent, this writ petition can be disposed of with a direction.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P4 stay petition, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
WP(C) NO.30332 OF 2021 3
Until such orders are passed, coercive proceedings pursuant to Ext.P1assessment order shall be kept in abeyance. The writ petition is disposed of. BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, JUDGE AMV/14/01/2022
WP(C) NO.30332 OF 2021 4 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 30332/2021 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 28.3.2021. Exhibit P2OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 28.3.2021. Exhibit P3OF THE APPEAL DATED 22.4.2021. Exhibit P4OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 30.3.2021. Exhibit P5OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 2194 OF 2020. RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS NIL
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Dillip Kumar Behera vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, Mayurbhanj CircleOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Tvl.Dev Construction vs. The Proper OfficerMadras · 15 Oct 2026
- Abbal Dass Arya vs. Commissioner State Goods And Services Tax CommissionerUttarakhand · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Darbesh Medical Enterprise vs. State Of West Bengal And Ors.Calcutta · 15 Oct 2026
- Arun Aloysius Barnes vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Commercial TaxesKarnataka · 14 Oct 2026
