THE ATTAPPADI SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/9926/2020HC KeralaKLHC01025363202015 May 2020Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of the writ petition by directing the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Kochi Bench, to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's stay application (Ext.P4) within a period of four months from the date of receipt of the judgment. The Court further directed that any steps initiated by the Income Tax Department for the recovery of amounts due under the assessment order shall be kept in abeyance until orders are passed on the stay petition and communicated to the petitioner. The Court's reasoning was based on the precedent set by a Division Bench of the same High Court in a similar matter, which emphasized the need for timely disposal of stay applications and the protection of the assessee's interests during the pendency of such applications. The specific issue of the eligibility for Section 80P benefits was not decided on merits.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, The Attappadi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., filed a writ petition seeking a direction to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) to consider its application for stay. The petitioner had claimed the benefit of Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, which was rejected by the Assessing Officer and the Commissioner (Appeals). The assessment year in question is 2017-18. The petitioner relied on a previous judgment of the Kerala High Court in similar circumstances, which directed the ITAT to decide stay petitions within four months and keep recovery proceedings in abeyance until then. The writ petition challenges the inaction of the ITAT in deciding the stay application.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the ITAT should be directed to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's stay application (mixed law and fact, concerning the procedural obligation of the Tribunal under Section 254 of the Income Tax Act). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the ITAT has not considered their stay application, despite the appeal being filed. They relied on a High Court judgment (Ext.P5) which directed the ITAT to dispose of stay petitions within a specified period and to keep recovery proceedings in abeyance. The petitioner sought a similar direction. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments from the revenue regarding the delay in ITAT's decision or the merits of the stay application. The revenue was represented by the Government Pleader.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80P,Section 254

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 GOPINATH.P. FRIDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF MAY, 2020/25TH VAISAKHA, 1942 W.P(C) NO.9926 OF 2020 PETITIONER :: THE ATTAPPADI SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO. P-1197, AGALI, MANNARKKAD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, M.M. SURESH BABU, AGED 55, S/O. LATE AANDY. BY ADVS. SRI. HARISANKAR V. MENON SMT. MEERA V.MENON SMT.KRISHNA K 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. R1-3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.P.HARISH THIS WRIT PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15.05.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P(C) NO.9926 OF 2020 2 Dated this the 15th day of May, 2020

JUDGMENT This writ petition has been filed praying inter- alia for a direction to the 3rd respondent Tribunal to consider and pass orders on an application for stay.

2.

The petitioner claimed the benefit of Section 80P of the Income Tax Act. This claim was rejected by the Assessing Officer as well as by the Commissioner (Appeals).

3.

The petitioner places reliance on the judgment of a Division Bench of this Court, which is produced as Ext.P5 along with W.P.(C). No.9768/2020. The Division Bench has in similar circumstances, directed the Appellate Tribunal to consider and pass orders on the stay petition within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment and further directed that any proceedings initiated for recovery of amounts due from the W.P(C) NO.9926 OF 2020 3 petitioner shall be kept in abeyance till orders are passed on the stay petition and communicated to the petitioner.

4.

In the light of the above, this writ petition is disposed of directing the 3rd respondent, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kochi Bench, to consider and pass orders on the stay petition marked as Ext.P4 in this writ petition, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till orders are so passed and communicated to the petitioner, steps (if any) initiated by the Income Tax Department for recovery of amounts due under the assessment order, shall be kept in abeyance. With these directions, this writ petition is disposed of. ( )

GOPINATH.P, JUDGE pm

W.P(C) NO.9926 OF 2020 4 APPENDIX PETITIONERS EXTS: EXT. P1. COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2017-18 DATED 24-12-2019. EXT. P2. COPY OF APPELLATE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2017-18 DATED 03-03-2020. EXT. P3. COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 19-03-2020. EXT. P4. COPY OF PETITION FOR STAY FILED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 19-03-2020. EXT. P5. COPY OF JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C)-TMP – 36/2020 OF THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 11-04-2020.

More judgments on Section 80P

All 5,069 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80P →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →