ANDOORKONAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.3127 vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/32723/2019HC KeralaKLHC01085561201903 December 2019Author: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR3 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala, taking note of the petitioner's submission that the entire amounts due had been recovered through garnishee proceedings while the stay petition was pending, found that there was no scope for further recovery proceedings to be initiated by the respondents. Consequently, the Court directed the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (3rd respondent) to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's appeal (Ext.P4) within an outer time limit of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. The petitioner was directed to produce a copy of the judgment and the writ petition before the Tribunal for further action. The High Court did not decide the merits of the appeal itself but ensured its expeditious disposal.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Andoorkonam Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., filed an appeal (Ext.P4) and a stay petition (Ext.P5) before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (3rd respondent) against a rectified order under the Income Tax Act (Ext.P3). The petitioner contended that while the stay petition was pending, the respondents initiated garnishee proceedings and recovered the entire amounts due from the petitioner. The petitioner argued that no further recovery proceedings could be initiated given this situation. The High Court of Kerala was considering the writ petition (WP(C).No.32723 OF 2019(M)).

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal should be directed to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's appeal (Ext.P4) within a specified time frame, given that the entire disputed amount has already been recovered through garnishee proceedings initiated while the stay petition was pending. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that since the entire amounts due have been recovered through garnishee proceedings, there is no scope for further recovery by the respondents. They sought a direction for the Tribunal to decide their pending appeal. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the revenue regarding the issues raised by the petitioner. The focus of the High Court's decision was on the procedural aspect of disposing of the pending appeal.

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.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 03RD DAY OF DECEMBER 2019 / 12TH AGRAHAYANA, 1941 WP(C).No.32723 OF 2019(M) PETITIONER/S: ANDOORKONAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.3127 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY-IN-CHARGE, KEEZHAVOOR.P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695584. BY ADVS. SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR SRI.ADITHYA RAJEEV RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1),OFFICE OF THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,AAYAKAR BHAVAN,KAWDIAR.P.O,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN-695003. 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS), AAYAKAR BHAVAN,KOWDIAR,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695003. 3 THE REGISTRAR, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH, KENDRIYA BHAVAN,BLOCK NO.C1 AND C2,1ST FLOOR, KAKKANAD,COCHIN,PIN-682030. 4 THE NEDUMANGAD CO-OPERATIVE URBAN BANK LTD.NO.3193, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,VEMBAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT,PIN-695615. SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM,SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.12.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.32723 OF 2019(M) 2

JUDGMENT Against Ext.P3 rectified order under the Income Tax Act, the petitioner preferred Ext.P4 appeal and Ext.P5 stay petition before the 3rd respondent. It is the case of the petitioner that while the stay petition was pending consideration, the respondents initiated garnishee proceedings and recovered the entire amounts due from the petitioner. Taking note of the said submission, I find that there is no scope for further recovery proceedings to be initiated by the respondents. I, therefore, direct the 3rd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P4 appeal preferred by the petitioner within an outer time limit of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner. The petitioner shall produce copy of this judgment together with a copy of the writ petition before the 3rd respondent for further action. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE WP(C).No.32723 OF 2019(M) 3 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 AOF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2011-2012 DATED 13.12.2017 EXHIBIT P2 AOF THE ORDER DATED 17.12.2018 IN ITA NO.178/EF/TVM/CIT(A)/TVM/2017-18 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P3 AOF THE ORDER DATED 03.09.2019 IN ITA.NO.178/EF/TVM/CIT(A)/TVM/20170- 18,ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 154 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. EXHIBIT P4 AOF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM ALONG WITH AFFIDAVIT DATED 11.11.2019 AND CHELAN. EXHIBIT P5 AOF THE STAY PETITION FILED ALONG WITH EXT-P4 APPEAL DATED 11.11.2019. EXHIBIT P6 AOF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 26.11.2019 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P7 AOF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 25.11.2019. EXHIBIT P8 AOF THE JUDGMENT DATED 19.07.2019 IN W.A.NO.1639 OF 2019 AND CONNECTED MATTERS.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →