THE ARUVIKKARA FARMERS SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO. 603 vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/4221/2020HC KeralaKLHC01011799202014 February 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 with a direction to the third respondent (Registrar, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) to take up and consider the application for interim stay filed along with the appeal within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. The Tribunal was directed to pass an appropriate order in accordance with law after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The Court also stated that if the petitioner is successful regarding the interim order, no further order would be required. Otherwise, the petitioner would be at liberty to assail the order in accordance with law. Until the disposal of the interim application, any contemplated demand was ordered to be kept in abeyance.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Aruvikara Farmers Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., is an assessee. The assessment order under challenge was dated 30.11.2016. The assessee sought rectification of this order under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, which was dismissed on 3.9.2019. Subsequently, the assessee filed an appeal on 30.1.2020 along with a stay petition. The petitioner's grievance is that these applications for stay and appeal have not yet been taken up for consideration. The Revenue stated that no demand has been issued pursuant to the dismissal of the rectification petition.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) should be directed to take up and consider the application for interim stay filed along with the appeal within a specified period? (Question of procedure, not directly of law or fact turning on a specific provision). Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that their appeal and stay petition, filed on 30.1.2020, had not been considered by the ITAT, causing prejudice. They sought a direction for expeditious disposal of these applications. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue submitted that no demand had been issued in pursuance to the dismissal of the rectification petition, implying no immediate coercive action was being taken against the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 154

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH, KENDRIYA

FOR THE YEAR 2011-2012 DATED 30.11.2016. EXHIBIT P2 AOF THE ORDER DATED 10.12.2018 IN ITA NO.122/EF/TVM/CIT(A)/TVM/2017-18 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3 AOF THE ORDER DATED 03.09.2019 IN ITA NO.122/EF/TVM/CIT(A)/TVM/2017-18 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 154 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. EXHIBIT P4 AOF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM DATED 30.1.2020 ALONG WITH AFFIDAVIT AND CHELAN. EXHIBIT P5 AOF THE STAY PETITION FILED ALONG WITH EXT-P4 APPEAL DATED 30.01.2020. EXHIBIT P6 AOF THE JUDGMENT DATED 19.07.2019 IN WA NO.1639 OF 2019. EXHIBIT P7 AOF THE JUDGMENT DATED 25.11.2019 IN WP(C) NO.31690 OF 2019. EXHIBIT P8 AOF THE JUDGMENT DATED 29.11.2019 IN WP(C) NO.32424 OF 2019.

More judgments on Section 154

All 8,676 judgments and leading authorities on Section 154 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →