KADAVALLOOR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO. 3821, vs. THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES,

WP(C)/10604/2020HC KeralaKLHC01027453202029 May 2020Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL3 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition with a specific direction to the third respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The Commissioner was directed to decide the appeals (Exts.P2, P4, P6) in accordance with the law. This decision must be made after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Crucially, the court directed that the decision should be made within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Furthermore, the Commissioner was instructed not to insist on the payment of 20% of the tax demanded, as per a circular issued in 2017. Until a decision is taken on the appeals, recovery proceedings pursuant to the assessment orders are to be kept in abeyance. No issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Kadavalloor Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala seeking a direction for the disposal of appeals and interim applications filed before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). These appeals were against assessment orders passed by the Income Tax Officer. The petitioner sought a direction for the third respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals) to decide appeals marked as Exts.P2, P4, P6 and interim applications marked as Exts.P10, P11, and P12. The assessment orders against which these appeals were filed were marked as Exts.P1, P3, and P5.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) should be directed to dispose of the pending appeals and interim applications filed by the petitioner? 2. Whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) should be directed to decide the appeals without insisting on the payment of 20% of the tax demanded, as per a 2017 circular? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner bank sought a direction for the expeditious disposal of their appeals and interim applications before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). They also sought to have the appeals decided without the pre-condition of paying 20% of the tax demanded, referencing a circular from 2017. Revenue's Contention: The judgment records that the learned counsel for both sides were heard, implying the revenue was represented. However, specific arguments or contentions from the revenue are not detailed in the provided text.

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 AMIT RAWAL FRIDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF MAY 2020 / 8TH JYAISHTA, 1942 WP(C).No.10604 OF 2020(A) PETITIONER/S: KADAVALLOOR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO. 3821, KADAVALLOOR, P. O., KADAVALLUR THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680 543, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI - 110001, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN. 2 THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX KERALA REGION, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDINGS, I.S. PRESS ROAD, KOCHI - 682 018. 3 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX APPEALS, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX APPEAL, TRICHUR. 4 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD I, INCOME TAX OFFICE, CITY PLAZA, WEST NADA, GURUVAYOOR. OTHER PRESENT: GP DR THUSHARA JAMES THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29.05.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.10604 OF 2020(A) 2

JUDGMENT Petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to dispose of Exts.P2, P4, P6 appeals and Exts.P10, P11and P12 interim

applications

preferred

before

the third respondent/Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) against the assessment orders Exts.P1, P3 and P5. 2. Having heard the learned counsel on both sides, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the third respondent to take a decision on Exts.P2, P4, P6 appeals in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment without insisting on payment of 20% of the tax demanded, as per circular of 2017. Till such time a decision is taken on the appeal, recovery proceedings pursuant to the assessment orders shall be kept in abeyance. AMIT RAWAL JUDGE nak

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER YEAR 2008-09 WITH COMPUTATION STATEMENT DATED 31.12.2015. EXHIBIT P2OF THE APPEAL DATED 03.02.2016. EXHIBIT P3OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2013-2014 WITH COMPUTATION STATEMENT DATED 11.03.2016. EXHIBIT P4OF THE APPEAL DATED 10.04.2016. EXHIBIT P5OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2014-2015 WITH COMPUTATION STATEMENT DATED 19.12.2016. EXHIBIT P6OF THE APPEAL DATED 19.01.2017. EXHIBIT P7OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 11.03.2016. EXHIBIT P8OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 19.12.2016. EXHIBIT P9OF THE ORDER DATED 28.03.2019. EXHIBIT P10OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 01.04.2019. EXHIBIT P11OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 01.04.2019. EXHIBIT P12OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 01.04.2019. EXHIBIT P13OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C) NO.25262/2016 AND CONNECTED CASES DATED 7.4.2017. EXHIBIT P14OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C) NO.10807/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES DATED 5.4.2019. EXHIBIT P15OF THE ORDER DATED 2.7.2019. EXHIBIT P16OF THE ORDER DATED 2.7.2019. EXHIBIT P17OF THE ORDER DATED 2.7.2019.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →