KOOTHATTUKULAM HOUSING CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. NO. E.728 vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/17832/2022HC KeralaKLHC01036445202209 June 2022Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI4 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala noted that a letter dated 02.06.2022, addressed by the 1st respondent (Income Tax Officer) to the petitioner's Secretary, was placed before the court. This letter stated that the 2nd respondent had already paid Rs.98,140/-. Furthermore, the 1st respondent's office undertook to recover the balance amount as mentioned in the recovery notice dated 22.11.2021, subject to applicable Government rules. In light of this specific undertaking by the 1st respondent, the High Court closed the writ petition. The petitioner was granted liberty to approach the court again if there was any violation of the undertaking. No specific finding was made on the legal obligation under Section 37 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969, as the matter was resolved by the undertaking.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Koothattukulam Housing Co-operative Society Ltd., filed a writ petition seeking a direction to the Income Tax Officer (1st respondent) to deduct amounts from the salary of the 2nd respondent and remit them to the petitioner's account, as per Section 37 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969. The 2nd respondent owed money to the petitioner, and the grievance was that despite requests, no deductions were made by the 1st respondent. The matter was brought before the High Court of Kerala.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the 1st respondent (Income Tax Officer) is obligated to make deductions from the salary of the 2nd respondent and remit the same to the petitioner in accordance with Section 37 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969, to recover dues owed by the 2nd respondent to the petitioner? Assessee's contention: The petitioner argued that the 1st respondent failed to make the necessary deductions from the 2nd respondent's salary despite requests, and sought a direction for such recovery. The petitioner relied on Section 37 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969. Revenue's contention: The judgment does not record specific contentions from the revenue. However, a letter from the 1st respondent was placed before the court.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 37

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 T.R.RAVI THURSDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 19TH JYAISHTA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 17832 OF 2022 PETITIONER: KOOTHATTUKULAM HOUSING CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. NO. E.728 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, KOOTHATTUKULAM P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT -686662. BY ADV JAMES ABRAHAM (VILAYAKATTU) RESPONDENTS: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, OFFICE OF PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL CIRCLE), KANDAMKULATHY TOWER, M.G. ROAD, ERNAKULAM-682016. 2 SATHEESHBABU V.K. ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER (GRADE III), OFFICE OF PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL CIRCLE), KANDAMKULATHY TOWER, M.G. ROAD, ERNAKULAM-682016. SRI.BIMAL K. NATH, SR. GP SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 17832 OF 2022 2

JUDGMENT The writ petition has been filed by a Co-operative Society seeking a direction to the 1st respondent to make necessary deductions from the salary of the 2nd respondent and remit the same to the petitioner's account in accordance with Section 37 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969. The 2nd respondent owes money to the petitioner and the grievance is that even though request was made to the 1st respondent, no deductions were made.

2.

When the case is taken up today, the counsel for the petitioner placed before me a letter addressed on behalf of the 1st respondent to the Secretary of the petitioner Society, stating that the 2nd respondent has already paid a sum of Rs.98,140/- and that the office undertakes to recover the balance amount as mentioned in the recovery notice dated 22.11.2021 subject to the Government rules issued in that regard. In view of the specific undertaking given by the 1st

WP(C) NO. 17832 OF 2022 3 respondent in the letter dated 02.06.2022, this writ petition is closed with liberty to the petitioner to approach this Court, if there is any violation of the undertaking. T.R.RAVI JUDGE mpm

WP(C) NO. 17832 OF 2022 4

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 17832/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 27.10.2020, WHICH CERTIFIED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 27.10.2020 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT AND CERTIFIED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LOAN SURETY AGREEMENT DATED 30.11.2020. Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 12.8.2021 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 11.10.2021 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 22.11.2021 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 14.1.2022 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 5.4.2022 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

More judgments on Section 37

All 4,334 judgments and leading authorities on Section 37 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →