KEECHERY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED NO.668 vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/8950/2021HC KeralaKLHC01023880202108 April 2021Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.M.BADAR4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of the writ petition by directing the 3rd respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi) to decide the pending stay petition (Exhibit P3) within a period of three months from the date of the order, following due process of law. Until the disposal of the stay petition by the 3rd respondent, the respondents were directed to defer the recovery proceedings initiated pursuant to the assessment order (Exhibit P1). The court did not decide on the merits of the claim for deduction under Section 80P, as the matter was pending before the appellate authority.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Keechery Service Co-operative Bank Limited, is challenging an assessment order (Exhibit P1) passed by the Income Tax Officer (respondent 1). The petitioner was denied the benefit of deduction under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act. The petitioner filed an appeal (Exhibit P2) and a stay application (Exhibit P3) before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (respondent 3). Despite the pending appeal and stay petition, the National E-Assessment Centre (respondent 2) is insisting on recovery of the amount determined in the assessment order. The petitioner filed this writ petition seeking appropriate directions.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of deduction under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961, when the return of income was not filed within the due date? (Question of law and fact, turning on Section 80P). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner is challenging the assessment order by filing an appeal and stay petition before the appellate authority. The primary grievance is the insistence on recovery proceedings while the stay petition is pending. Revenue's Contention: The petitioner is not entitled to the benefit of deduction under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act as the return was not filed within the due date. However, the revenue acknowledges that as the stay petition is pending before the appellate authority, appropriate orders can be passed for deferring recovery proceedings until the disposal of the stay petition.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80P

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.M.BADAR THUR AY, THE 08TH DAY OF APRIL 2021 / 18TH CHAITHRA, 1943 WP(C).No.8950 OF 2021(P) PETITIONER: KEECHERY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED NO.668, APXII/135, KULAYATTIKKARA, KANJIRAMATTOM, ERNAKULAM, PIN 682 317, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY SRI. REJISON JOHN. BY ADVS. SRI.K.S.HARIHARAN NAIR SMT.G.REMADEVI SHRI.RAJATH R NATH SMT.HARIMA HARIHARAN RESPONDENTS: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1), CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, I.S.PRESS ROAD, KOCHI 682 018. 2 THE ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME TAX OFFICER, NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI 110 001. 3 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, DELHI 110 001. R1-3 BY SRI. CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, STANDING COUNSEL. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.04.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No.8950 OF 2021 2 JUDGMENT Dated this the 08th day of April 2021

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. The learned Standing Counsel takes notice for the respondents.

2.

According to the petitioner, the respondent has denied benefit of deduction under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act to the petitioner and the petitioner has challenged the Assessment Order by filing an appeal, Exhibit P2 with stay application Exhibit P3 before the 3rd respondent. However, during pendency of the appeal and stay petition, the 2nd respondent is insisting for effecting recovery in pursuant to the amount determined by the assessment order at Exhibit P1. 3. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the petitioner is not entitled to the benefit of deduction under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act as the return was not filed in due date. He however submits that as the stay petition is pending before the appellate

WP(C).No.8950 OF 2021 3 authority, appropriate orders can be passed for deferring the recovery proceedings till disposal of the stay petition. In this view of the matter, as the stay petition Exhibit P3 is pending for adjudication before the 3rd respondent, the petition is disposed of with a direction to the 3rd respondent to decide the pending stay petition Exhibit P3 within a period of three months from today by following due process of law. Till disposal of the stay petition, Exhibit P3 by the 3rd respondent, the respondents are directed to defer recovery proceedings initiated in pursuant to the assessment order at Exhibit P1. The petition, is disposed of as above. A.M.BADAR JUDGE SSK/08/04

WP(C).No.8950 OF 2021 4

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 12.3.2021 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2018-19 EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF APPEAL MEMORANDUM DATED 30.3.2021 AGAINST EXT. P1 EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 30.3.2021 IN EXT. P1 APPEAL. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:NIL SSK //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE

More judgments on Section 80P

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →