PALAKKAD SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/10451/2021HC KeralaKLHC01028736202127 April 2021Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS4 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioner expeditiously and in a time-bound manner. Taking note of the exceptional circumstances, particularly the Supreme Court judgment cited by the assessee's counsel, the Court also ordered a stay of all coercive steps against the assessment order pending the disposal of the appeal. The Court did not decide the merits of the deduction under Section 80P but focused on procedural directions for the appellate authority and interim relief for the assessee. The operative direction is to dispose of the appeal expeditiously and to stay coercive steps.

What were the facts?

The writ petitioner, M/s Palakkad Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., represented by its Secretary, filed a writ petition seeking a direction to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to consider and pass orders on its appeal expeditiously. The petitioner also sought to avoid payment of any amount for a stay of the demand arising from the assessment order. The appeal before the appellate authority concerns the entitlement to deduction under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act. The petitioner's counsel contended that the matter is covered by a Supreme Court judgment. The assessment order was passed by the Income Tax Officer, National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi, and the appeal is pending before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) should be directed to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's appeal expeditiously, without insisting on any payment for stay of demand? (Question of procedure and direction) Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the appeal should be considered and disposed of as expeditiously as possible without demanding payment for stay. They relied on the judgment in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. & Others v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Calicut & Another ([2021 (1) KHC 303]), which they contended governs the appeal and covers the issue of deduction under Section 80P. Revenue's Contention: The judgment records no specific argument from the revenue regarding the direction for expeditious disposal or the stay of demand.

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 BECHU KURIAN THOMAS TUESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF APRIL 2021 / 7TH VAISAKHA, 1943 WP(C).No.10451 OF 2021(F) PETITIONER/S: M/S PALAKKAD SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. F-1200, G.B.ROAD, PALAKKAD, 678001, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MR.C. RAMESH KUMAR, BY ADVS. SRI.A.KUMAR SMTG.MINI(1748) RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, DELHI - 110011. 2 INCOME TAX OFFICER NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI - 110011. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27.04.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) No.10451/2021 ..2..

JUDGMENT The writ petitioner seeks for a direction to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3 appeal as expeditiously as possible without insisting on any payment of any amount for stay of the demand as per Ext.P1 assessment order.

2.

I have heard Adv.A.Kumar, learned counsel for the writ petitioner as well as the learned Standing Counsel, Sri.Jose Joseph for the respondents.

3.

The issue in the appeal before the appellate court arises from an assessment order, in which the question of entitlement of the benefit of deduction under Section 80P of the Income Tax arises for consideration. The judgment in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. & Others v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Calicut & Another reported in [2021 (1) KHC 303] governs the appeal.

4.

Since the assessment order is already challenged and is now pending in appeal before the 1st ..3.. respondent, I am of the opinion that in the circumstances of the case, the appeal itself can be directed to be disposed of in a time bound manner and as expeditiously as possible, taking note of the contention of the counsel for the assessee that the matter is covered by the decision of the apex court.

5.

In the circumstances, there will be a direction to the 1st respondent to dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioner as expeditiously as possible in a time bound manner. Taking note of the exceptional circumstances arising in the case, especially, in the light of the Supreme Court judgment referred to above, there shall be a stay of all coercive steps against Ext.P1 assessment order pending disposal of the appeal before the 1st respondent. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE bka/- ..4..

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 30.03.2021. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 30.03.2021. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR STAY.

More judgments on Section 80P

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →