THE KUMARAMPUTHUR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/5671/2020HC KeralaKLHC01015099202025 June 2020Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL3 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the third respondent (ITAT) to decide the appeal (Ext.P3) within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. The ITAT was also directed to afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Crucially, the ITAT was instructed not to insist on the payment of 20% of the tax demanded, as per a circular of 2017. Until a decision is taken on the appeal, recovery proceedings pursuant to the assessment order are to be kept in abeyance. The High Court did not decide on the merits of the appeal itself, but rather on the procedural aspect of its disposal. No issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, The Kumaranputhur Service Co-operative Bank Ltd, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala seeking a direction to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), the third respondent, to dispose of its appeal and stay application. The appeal was filed against an appellate order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The petitioner sought a direction for the ITAT to decide the appeal, which was pending. The assessment year(s) and the specific amount in dispute are not recorded in the judgment. The procedural history involves the filing of an appeal and a stay application before the ITAT.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should direct the ITAT to dispose of the pending appeal and stay application filed by the petitioner? (Question of procedure/administrative direction) The petitioner contended that their appeal and stay application before the ITAT were pending and sought a direction for expeditious disposal. The revenue's contentions are not recorded in the judgment. The judgment does not explicitly state the specific grounds of appeal or the arguments made by either party regarding the merits of the case, focusing instead on the procedural aspect of the pending appeal.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL THUR AY, THE 25TH DAY OF JUNE 2020 / 4TH ASHADHA, 1942 WP(C).No.5671 OF 2020(H) PETITIONER/S: THE KUMARAMPUTHUR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO.P 373, MANNARKKAD COLLEGE.P.O, KUMARAMPUTHUR, MANNARKKAD, PALAKKAD-678583, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY- IN -CHARGE, N.KRISHNADAS AGED 57, S/O.RAGHAVAN NAIR. BY ADVS. SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON SMT.MEERA V.MENON RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 3, AYAKAR BHAVAN, PALAKKAD-678014 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) AYAKAR BHAVAN, THRISSUR-680001 3 THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AYAKAR BHAVAN, KAKKANADU, KOCHI-682030, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR OTHER PRESENT: SRI JOSE JOSEPH SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.06.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No.5671 OF 2020(H) 2 JUDGMENT Dated this the 25th day of June 2020 Petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to dispose of Ext.P3 appeal and stay application Ext.P4 preferred before the third respondent against the appellate order Ext.P2. 2. Having heard the learned counsel on both sides, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the third respondent to take a decision on Ext.P3 appeal in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment without insisting on payment of 20% of the tax demanded, as per circular of 2017. Till such time a decision is taken on the appeal, recovery proceedings pursuant to the assessment order shall be kept in abeyance. AMIT RAWAL JUDGE Jm/

WP(C).No.5671 OF 2020(H) 3

Appendix — schedule of exhibits

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2013-14 EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF APPELLATE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2013-14 EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT -2013 -14 EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →