THE THADUKKASSERY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.F 534, vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/9828/2020HC KeralaKLHC01025129202012 May 2020Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of the writ petition by directing the 3rd respondent, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kochi Bench, to consider and pass orders on the stay petition (marked as Ext.P4) within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. The Court further directed that until orders are passed on the stay petition and communicated to the petitioner, any steps initiated by the Income Tax Department for recovery of amounts due under the assessment order shall be kept in abeyance. The Court did not decide the merits of the Section 80P claim itself, but rather focused on expediting the consideration of the stay application by the ITAT.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, The Thadukkassery Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., filed a writ petition seeking a direction to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) to consider its application for stay. The petitioner had claimed the benefit of Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, which was rejected by the Assessing Officer and the Commissioner (Appeals). The petitioner relied on a previous Division Bench judgment of the High Court of Kerala in a similar case, which directed the ITAT to decide a stay petition within four months and keep recovery proceedings in abeyance until then.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal should be directed to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's stay application? (Question of procedure/mandamus) Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the ITAT should be directed to consider its stay application, relying on a Division Bench judgment of the High Court of Kerala in a similar case (Ext.P5 in W.P.(C). No.9768/2020). This judgment mandated the ITAT to decide stay petitions within four months and halt recovery proceedings during that period. Revenue's Contention: The judgment records no specific contentions from the revenue regarding the direction to the ITAT to consider the stay petition.

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 GOPINATH.P. TUESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF MAY,2020/22ND VAISAKHA, 1942 W.P(C) NO. 9828 OF 2020 PETITIONER : THE THADUKKASSERY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO. F 534, KERALASSERY P.O, KONGAD, PALAKKAD – 678 641, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VIJAYAKUMARI M.P., AGED 51, D/O. NARAYANAN NAIR. BY ADVS. SRI. ARIKKAT VIJAYAN MENON SRI. HARISANKAR. V. MENON SMT. MEERA. V. MENON SMT. KRISHNA.K. RESPONDENTS:: 1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2, AYAKAR BHAVAN, PALAKKAD – 678 014. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), THRISSUR – 680 021. 3. THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AYAKAR BHAVAN, KAKKANADU, KOCHI – 682 030, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR. BY SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM - SC THIS WRIT PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.05.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P(C) NO. 9828 OF 2020 2 Dated this the 12th day of May, 2020

JUDGMENT This writ petition has been filed praying inter- alia for a direction to the 3rd respondent Tribunal to consider and pass orders on an application for stay.

2.

The petitioner claimed the benefit of Section 80P of the Income Tax Act. This claim was rejected by the Assessing Officer as well as by the Commissioner (Appeals).

3.

The petitioner places reliance on the judgment of a Division Bench of this Court, which is produced as Ext.P5 along with W.P.(C). No.9768/2020. The Division Bench has in similar circumstances, directed the Appellate Tribunal to consider and pass orders on the stay petition within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment and further directed that any proceedings initiated for recovery of amounts due from the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance till orders are W.P(C) NO. 9828 OF 2020 3 passed on the stay petition and communicated to the petitioner.

4.

In the light of the above, this writ petition is disposed of directing the 3rd respondent, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kochi Bench, to consider and pass orders on the stay petition marked as Ext.P4 in this writ petition, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till orders are so passed and communicated to the petitioner, steps (if any) initiated by the Income Tax Department for recovery of amounts due under the assessment order, shall be kept in abeyance. With these directions, this writ petition is disposed of. GOPINATH.P, JUDGE n W.P(C) NO. 9828 OF 2020 4

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS: EXT. P1. COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2017-18 DATED 24-12-2019. EXT. P2. COPY OF APPELLATE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2017-18 DATED 03-03-2020. EXT. P3. COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 18-03-2020. EXT. P4. COPY OF PETITION FOR STAY FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 18-03-2020.

More judgments on Section 80P

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →