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

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/8154/2020HC KeralaKLHC01021117202017 March 2020Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, disposed of the writ petition. It directed the 3rd respondent (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) to consider the interim application (Ext.P4) filed along with the appeal in accordance with law. This consideration was to be done after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner within 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. The Court also ordered that the operation of the garnishee notice (Ext.P5) be kept in abeyance until the disposal of the interim application. It was clarified that this interim stay was only till the disposal of the interim application and not beyond.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, The Akatethara 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) to consider its stay petition filed along with an appeal. The appeal was against assessment orders and the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The petitioner stated that the appeal and stay application were filed on March 9, 2020, and subsequently, a garnishee notice was received. The petitioner approached the High Court due to this situation. The Government Pleader submitted that the ITAT would consider interim applications but appeals are taken up based on seniority.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should direct the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal to consider an interim stay petition filed along with an appeal, especially when a garnishee notice has been issued. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner bank argued that it had filed an appeal and a stay petition with the ITAT, but had received a garnishee notice, necessitating urgent consideration of the stay petition. The petitioner sought a direction from the High Court to the ITAT to consider this application. Revenue's Contention: The Government Pleader, representing the revenue, submitted that the ITAT would consider interim applications, but the appeals are processed based on their seniority. No specific argument was made against the consideration of the stay petition itself.

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 TUESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 27TH PHALGUNA, 1941 WP(C).No.8154 OF 2020(T) PETITIONER/S: THE AKATHETHARA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD, F-1514, AKATHETHARA POST, PALAKKAD - 678 008, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, SUBHA PRABHAKARA VARMA P., AGED 53, D/O.V.K.PRABHAKARA VARMA. BY ADVS. SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON SMT.MEERA V.MENON RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, PALAKKAD -678 001. 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), AYAKAR BHAVAN, THRISSUR - 680 001. 3 THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AYAKAR BHAVAN, KAKKANADU, KOCHI - 682030, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR. 4 THE KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK, ERSTWHILE PALAKKAD DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK, TOWN BUS STAND ROAD, PALAKKAD - 678 014. R4 BY SRI.M.SASINDRAN, SC, PALAKKAD DIST.CO.OP.BANK OTHER PRESENT: SRI JOSE JOSEPH SC SRI M SASINDRAN SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17.03.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.8154 OF 2020(T) 2

JUDGMENT The petitioner has approached this Court seeking directions to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal to consider Ext.P4 stay petition preferred along with the appeal, Ext.P3 against the orders of the assessment Ext.P1 and the first appellate court ie., the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) Ext.P2. 2. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the appeal and stay application have been filed on 9th March 2020. However, post thereto received a garnishee notice Ext.P5. In these circumstances, the petitioner has approached this Court.

3.

The learned Government Pleader submits that the Tribunal would not have any difficulty in taking up the interim application but the appeals are being taken up on seniority basis.

4.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and appraised the paper book.

WP(C).No.8154 OF 2020(T) 3 Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, I dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the 3rd respondent to consider Ext.P4 interim application preferred along with the appeal in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. Till such time, the operation of garnishee notice, Ext.P5 is ordered to be kept in abeyance. It is made clear that the interim stay is till the disposal of the interim application and not beyond. AMIT RAWAL sab JUDGE

WP(C).No.8154 OF 2020(T) 4

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2015-16. EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF APPELLATE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2015-16. EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT 2015-16. EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P5 COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →