THE PUDUKAD TOWN CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.NO.R.1036, vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)

WP(C)/8708/2020HC KeralaKLHC01022281202010 June 2020Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL3 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to decide the appeal (Ext.P3) filed by the Pudukad Town Co-operative Society Ltd. in accordance with the law. This decision is to be made after providing the petitioner with an opportunity of being heard. Crucially, the court specified that the Commissioner should not insist on the payment of 20% of the tax demanded, referencing a circular from 2017. Furthermore, the court ordered that recovery proceedings initiated pursuant to the assessment order should be kept in abeyance until a decision is taken on the appeal. The ratio of this judgment is that appellate authorities should dispose of pending appeals expeditiously and that recovery proceedings can be stayed pending such disposal, especially when a relevant circular permits waiver of pre-deposit conditions.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Pudukad Town Co-operative Society Ltd., filed an appeal (Ext.P3) before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) against an assessment order (Ext.P1). The petitioner approached the High Court of Kerala seeking a direction for the disposal of this pending appeal. The assessment order was passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(4), Thrissur. The procedural history involves the filing of the appeal before the first respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)) and the subsequent writ petition seeking its expeditious disposal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should direct the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to dispose of the pending appeal filed by the petitioner. Assessee's contention: The petitioner seeks a direction for the disposal of its appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The petitioner relies on a circular of 2017 which, it implies, allows for the appeal to be considered without insisting on the payment of 20% of the tax demanded. Revenue's contention: The judgment records that the learned counsel for both sides were heard, but does not explicitly detail the revenue's specific arguments regarding the disposal of the appeal or the conditions for it. However, the court's direction to not insist on the 20% payment suggests this might have been a point of contention or a condition that the revenue was seeking to enforce.

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 AMIT RAWAL WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF JUNE 2020 / 20TH JYAISHTA, 1942 WP(C).No.8708 OF 2020(K) PETITIONER: THE PUDUKAD TOWN CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.NO.R.1036, PUDUKAD, THRISSUR-680301, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN RESPONDENTS: 1 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AAYAKAR BHAVAN, S.T.NAGAR, THRISSUR-680001. 2 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(4), THRISSUR, OFFICE OF THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, SAKTHANTHAMPURAN NAGAR, THRISSUR-680001. SRI JOSE JOSEPH SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10.06.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.8708 OF 2020(K) 2

JUDGMENT

Petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to dispose of Ext.P3 appeal preferred before the first respondent/Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) against the assessment order Ext.P1. 2. Having heard the learned counsel on both sides, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the first 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 dlk/10.06.2020

WP(C).No.8708 OF 2020(K) 3 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 14.12.2018 ALONG WITH THE COMPUTATION SHEET. EXHIBIT P2OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 14.12.2018. EXHIBIT P3OF THE APPEAL DATED 17.01.2019. EXHIBIT P4OF THE ORDER DATED 10.09.2019. EXHIBIT P5OF STAY PETITION DATED 17.09.2019. EXHIBIT P6OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 26.10.2019. EXHIBIT P7OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 26.10.2019. EXHIBIT P8OF THE APPEAL DATED 14.11.2019. EXHIBIT P9OF THE ORDER DATED 17.01.2020. EXHIBIT P10OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 27.01.2020. EXHIBIT P11OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 01.07.2019 IN W.A.NO.1536 OF 2019.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →