THE THACHAMPARA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.3150, vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/9162/2020HC KeralaKLHC01023469202023 March 2020Author: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala held that recovery proceedings should be stayed until the appeal is disposed of by the Tribunal. The Court acknowledged that the issue of coverage under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was pending adjudication before the Tribunal and referenced the Full Bench decision in Mavilayil Service Co-operative Bank Limited v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Calicut [2019 (2) KHC 287 (FB)] as relevant to the underlying dispute. The Court explicitly stated that the disposal of the writ petition was made without any observation on the merits of the matter. The operative direction was to stay recovery until the appeal is disposed of.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, The Thachampara Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., filed a writ petition challenging recovery proceedings initiated by the Income Tax Officer (respondent 1). The dispute pertains to assessment year 2012-13 and concerns the applicability of Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner's second appeal and stay petition were pending before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (respondent 3). The High Court of Kerala was considering the writ petition against the recovery action while the appeal was pending before the Tribunal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether recovery proceedings can be initiated while a second appeal concerning the applicability of Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is pending before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal? Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that recovery should be stayed as their appeal on the merits of the Section 80P claim was pending before the Tribunal. They relied on the Full Bench decision in Mavilayil Service Co-operative Bank Limited v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Calicut [2019 (2) KHC 287 (FB)] for the underlying issue of Section 80P applicability. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the revenue regarding the stay of recovery proceedings.

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 K.VINOD CHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 3RD CHAITHRA, 1942 WP(C).No.9162 OF 2020 PETITIONER/S: THE THACHAMPARA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.3150, MAIN ROAD, THACHAMPARA, PALAKKAD-678593, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, JAYAKUMAR M., AGED 54, S/O.LATE PADMANABHAN NAIR. BY ADVS. SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON SMT.MEERA V.MENON RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4, AYAKAR BHAVAN, PALAKKAD-678014. 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), THRISSUR-680021. 3 THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AYAKAR BHAVAN, KAKKANADU, KOCHI-682030, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR. OTHER PRESENT: R1 & R2 BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, IT THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23.03.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) No.9162 of 2020 - 2 - K. Vinod Chandran, J. --------------------------------- W.P(C) No.9162 of 2020 --------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of March, 2020

JUDGMENT The writ petition is against the recovery initiated while an appeal is pending. The issue is also with respect to the coverage of the petitioner under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which has to be adjudicated on the basis of the Full Bench decision in Mavilayil Service Co

- operative Bank Limited v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Calicut [2019 (2) KHC 287 (FB)].

2.

In the present case, the demand is with respect to assessment year 2012-13. Exhibit P3 second appeal along with Exhibit P4 stay petition are pending before the Tribunal. In the circumstance of the case, I am of the opinion that there shall be a stay of recovery till the appeal is disposed of. The writ petition is disposed of with the above direction, without any observation on the merits of the matter. K.VINOD CHANDRAN JUDGE Vku/-

WP(C) No.9162 of 2020 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2012-13 DATED 25.3.2015. EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF APPELLATE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2012-13 DATED 17.02.2020. EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT 2012-13 DATED 13.03.2020. EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 13.3.2020. []

More judgments on Section 80P

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →