THE VALLUVALLY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED NO E-139, vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/8573/2020HC KeralaKLHC01022131202018 March 2020Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL3 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition with a direction to the third respondent, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The ITAT was directed to take a decision on the appeal (Ext.P3) in accordance with the law. This decision was to be made after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The ITAT was also directed to decide the appeal within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Crucially, the ITAT was instructed not to insist on the payment of 20% of the tax demanded, as per a circular of 2017. Furthermore, until a decision was taken on the appeal, recovery proceedings pursuant to the assessment order were to be kept in abeyance. The judgment does not record any specific finding on the merits of the assessment order or the appeal itself, as it is a procedural direction.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, The Valluvally Service Co-operative Bank Limited, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The petition sought a direction for the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), the third respondent, to consider and dispose of an appeal (Ext.P3) and a stay petition (Ext.P4) filed against an assessment order (Ext.P1). The assessment order was passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward 3, Aluva. The appeal and stay petition were filed against the assessment order and the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The procedural history indicates that the appeal and stay petition were pending before the ITAT.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should direct the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal to consider and dispose of the pending appeal and stay petition filed by the assessee against the assessment order. Assessee's Contention: The assessee contended that their appeal and stay petition were pending before the ITAT and sought a direction for expeditious disposal. The assessee also sought a direction to keep recovery proceedings in abeyance until the appeal was decided. Revenue's Contention: The judgment records that the learned counsel for both sides were heard, implying the revenue was represented. However, specific arguments or contentions of the revenue are not detailed in the provided text.

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 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1941 WP(C).No.8573 OF 2020(V) PETITIONER: THE VALLUVALLY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED NO E-139, NORTH PARAVUR, KOONAMMAVU P.O., ALUVA, PIN-683 518, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY SMT.LILA.M.J. BY ADVS. K.S.HARIHARAN NAIR SMT.G.REMADEVI SMT.HARIMA HARIHARAN SHRI.RAJATH R NATH RESPONDENTS: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 3, K.A.P COMMERCIAL COMPLEX, RAILWAY STATION ROAD, ALUVA-683 101 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), POORNIMA BUILDING, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, ERNAKULAM-682 036. 3 THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KENDRIYA BHAVAN, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM-682 037. SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18.03.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) No.8573/2020 2

JUDGMENT The petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to consider and dispose of Ext.P3 appeal and Ext.P4 stay petition preferred before the third respondent/Income Tax Appellate Tribunal against Ext.P1 assessment order. Having heard the learned counsel on both sides, this 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 csl

W.P.(C) No.8573/2020 3

Appendix — schedule of exhibits

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 22.12.2016 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF APPELLATE ORDER DATED 20.12.2019 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF APPEAL MEMORANDUM FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 17.2.2020 AGAINST EXT P2 EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 16.3.2020 IN EXT P3 APPEAL

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →