KALLAMKUNNU SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED NO. R314 vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/12641/2021HC KeralaKLHC01034255202124 June 2021Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.M.BADAR4 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of the writ petition with specific directions. The Court directed the 3rd respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi) to decide the pending application for condonation of delay (Ext.P3) within four months from the date of the order. If the occasion arises, the Court also directed the 3rd respondent to decide the application for stay (Ext.P4) within the same period, after hearing the petitioner. The Court emphasized that the petitioner should cooperate with the respondents for the expeditious disposal of the applications and, if necessary, the main appeal. Crucially, the Court ordered that until the disposal of the application for condonation of delay, and if required, the stay petition, the respondents shall not initiate any coercive steps or recovery of the amount determined by the assessment order (Ext.P1). The Standing Counsel was directed to communicate the judgment to the concerned respondent for compliance. No issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Kallamkunnu Service Co-operative Bank Limited, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The petitioner had an assessment order (Ext.P1) passed by the 2nd respondent. Against this order, the petitioner filed a statutory appeal (Ext.P2) along with an application for condonation of delay (Ext.P3) and a stay petition (Ext.P4) before the 3rd respondent. These proceedings were pending. The petitioner alleged that despite the pendency of the appeal and interlocutory applications, the respondents were insisting on payment of the amount determined by the assessment order and were proposing to initiate coercive recovery steps. The amount in dispute is not specified.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the respondents can insist on payment of the amount determined by the assessment order and initiate coercive steps for recovery while the statutory appeal, along with an application for condonation of delay and a stay petition, is pending before the appellate authority? Assessee's contention: The petitioner argued that coercive steps for recovery should not be initiated while their statutory appeal and related applications are pending before the 3rd respondent. The petitioner relied on the pendency of their appeal and applications for condonation of delay and stay. Revenue's contention: The learned Standing Counsel for the respondents submitted that the appeal along with the applications is pending before the 3rd respondent and suggested that the Court could direct the 3rd respondent to decide these matters in a time-bound manner.

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 A.M.BADAR THURSDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF JUNE 2021 / 3RD ASHADHA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 12641 OF 2021 PETITIONER/S: KALLAMKUNNU SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED NO. R314 KALLAMKUNNU PO, NADAVARAMBA, THRISSUR 680 661 REPRESENTATED BY ITS SECRETARY, SRI. GANESH C.K. BY ADVS. K.S.HARIHARAN NAIR G.REMADEVI RAJATH R NATH HARIMA HARIHARAN RESPONDENT/S: 1 INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(2), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, SAKTHAN THAMPURAN NAGAR, THRISSUR PIN 680 001 2 THE ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME TAX OFFICER, NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI – 110 001 3 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, DELHI 220 001 SRI. JOSE JOSEPH, STANDING COUNSEL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24.06.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 12641 OF 2021 2

JUDGMENT

Heard both sides.

As against the assessment order at Ext.P1 passed by the 2nd respondent, the petitioner has preferred a statutory appeal at Ext.P2 alongwith an application for condonation of delay (Ext.P3) and a stay petition(Ext.P4) and those proceedings are reported to be pending before the 3rd respondent. It is the case of the petitioner that despite pendency of the statutory appeal alongwith interlocutory applications, the respondents are insisting for payment of the amount determined by the assessment order at Ext.P1 and are proposing to initiate coercive steps for recovery of the same. .

Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the appeal alongwith the applications is pending before the 3rd respondent and the same can be directed to be decided in a time bound manner.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the instant case, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:-

The 3rd respondent is directed to decide the pending application for WP(C) NO. 12641 OF 2021 3 condonation of delay (Ext.P3) and if the occasion arises, the application for stay (Ext.P4), within a period of four months from today, after hearing the petitioner. Needless to mention that the petitioner should co-operate with the respondents in expeditious disposal of the application for condonation of delay, and if necessary, the stay petition as well as the main appeal also. Till disposal of the application for condonation of delay, and if required, the stay petition (Ext.P4) as directed by this Court, the respondents shall not proceed to initiate any coercive steps or recovery of the amount, determined by the assessment order at Ext.P1. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents is directed to communicate this judgment to the concerned respondent for compliance. A.M.BADAR JUDGE ajt

WP(C) NO. 12641 OF 2021 4

Appendix — schedule of exhibits

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 – COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 17-03-2021 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2018-19 EXHIBIT P2 – COPY OF APPEAL MEMORANDUM DATED 29-04-2021 AGAINST EXHIBIT P1 EXHIBIT P3 – COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 29-04-2021 IN EXHIBIT P2 APPEAL EXHIBIT P4 – COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 29-04-2021 IN EXT. P2 APPEAL

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →