VALLACHIRA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.NO. 527, vs. THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES,

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/20471/2021HC KeralaKLHC01052944202129 September 2021Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN4 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed the writ petition. It directed the competent respondent or the Authority under the faceless scheme to take up and dispose of the petitioner's appeal (Ext.P2) expeditiously, after affording the petitioner an opportunity of being heard, as per the Act. The Court held that the Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Limited judgment, cited by the revenue, prima facie had some bearing on the issues raised by the petitioner. Consequently, until the appeal was disposed of and the resultant order communicated, all action for recovery of amounts as per the assessment order (Ext.P1) would stand deferred. The Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Vallachira Service Co-operative Society Ltd., filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The petition challenged an assessment order (Ext.P1) but acknowledged that a statutory appeal (Ext.P2) had been filed against it before the competent Appellate Authority. The petitioner sought a direction for the Appellate Authority to dispose of the appeal and a stay on further proceedings pursuant to the assessment order until the appeal was decided. The respondents, represented by the Income Tax Department, initially suggested that the appeal could be disposed of under the faceless scheme but argued against a stay on the assessment order, citing that the specific issues in this case were not covered by the Supreme Court's decision in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Limited.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should direct the competent Appellate Authority to take up and dispose of the statutory appeal filed by the petitioner against the assessment order, and stay recovery proceedings pursuant to the assessment order until such disposal. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner sought a direction for the disposal of its appeal (Ext.P2) and a stay on recovery proceedings under the assessment order (Ext.P1) until the appeal was decided. Revenue's Contention: The revenue submitted that the appeal could be disposed of under the faceless scheme. However, it argued that the petitioner could not seek a stay of the assessment order because the specific issues in this case were not dealt with in the Supreme Court's decision in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Limited and other v. Commission of Income Tax, Calicut and another [2021 (1) KHC 303].

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80P

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 DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 7TH ASWINA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 20471 OF 2021 PETITIONER: VALLACHIRA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.NO. 527, III/378 P.O. VALLACHIRA, THRISSUR-680 562, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY GIRIJA K. BY ADVS. K.P.PRADEEP HAREESH M.R. RASMI NAIR T. T.T.BIJU T.THASMI M.J.ANOOPA RESPONDENTS: 1 THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI 110 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN. 2 INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1)- THRISSUR AAYAKAR BHAVAN, INCOME TAX OFFICE, SAKTHANTHAMPURAN NAGAR, THRISSUR 680 001. 3 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), THRISSUR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, SAKTHANTHAMPURAN NAGAR, THRISSUR-680 001 4 THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI ROOM NO. 401, 2ND FLOOR, E- RAP, JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM, DELHI 110 003. OTHER PRESENT: JOSE JOSEPH- SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 20471 OF 2021 2

J U D G M E N T The petitioner, which is a Co-operative Society, has approached this Court impugning Ext.P1 but conceding that Ext.P2 statutory appeal has been preferred against it before the competent Appellate Authority. They, therefore, pray that said Authority be directed to take up and dispose of Ext.P2 appeal and stay further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P1 until such time.

2.

Sri.Jose Joseph, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, submitted that if the petitioner only requires Ext.P2 to be disposed of, then this Court may direct the competent Authority to do so, adding that it will have to be now done under the faceless Scheme. He then added that, however, the petitioner cannot seek a stay of Ext.P1 assessment because even though in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Limited and other v. Commission of Income Tax, Calicut and another [2021 (1) KHC 303], the Hon'ble Supreme Court has declared on the scope of Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, the specific issues in this case had not been dealt with.

3.

I am afraid that I cannot find full favour with the submissions of Sri.Jose Joseph as afore, because prima facie,

WP(C) NO. 20471 OF 2021 3 Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Limited (supra), has some bearing on the issues impelled by the petitioner in this case. I am, therefore, of the firm view that Ext.P2 appeal will require to be disposed of by the competent Authority, before recovery as per Ext.P1 assessment order is attempted or completed. Resultantly, I allow this writ petition and direct the competent respondent or such other Authority under the faceless Scheme, to take up Ext.P2 appeal and dispose it of, as expeditiously as is possible after affording necessary opportunity of being heard to the petitioner, as per the Act. Needless to say, until such time as the afore exercise is completed and the resultant order communicated to the petitioner, all action for recovery of amounts as per Ext.P1 assessment order will stand deferred. DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE rp

WP(C) NO. 20471 OF 2021 4

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 20471/2021 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO. ITBA/AST/S/143(3)/2021-22/1032378736 (1) DATED 12.04.2021 ISSUED FOR THE YEAR 2018-19. Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 07.05.2021 FILED FOR THE YEAR 2018-19. Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ITBA/RCV/F/17/2021- 22/1034790223 (1) DATED 11.08.2021 ISSUED FOR THE YEAR 2018-19 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

More judgments on Section 80P

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →