THE KARAMUCK SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.16, vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/9095/2020HC KeralaKLHC01022845202023 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 appeals are disposed of by the first appellate authority. The Court acknowledged that the issue concerning the petitioner's coverage under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was pending adjudication and required consideration based on the Full Bench decision in Mavilayil Service Co-Operative Bank Limited. The Court explicitly stated that the disposal of the writ petition was without any observation on the merits of the matter. The operative direction was to stay the recovery of demand until the appeals are decided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, The Karamuck Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd., filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala challenging recovery proceedings initiated by the revenue while appeals were pending. The dispute pertains to the assessment years 2012-2013 and 2016-2017. The petitioner's appeals (Exhibits P3 and P8) and stay petitions (Exhibits P5 and P10) were pending before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The core issue revolved around the applicability of Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961, to the petitioner.

What were the issues?

1. Whether recovery proceedings can be initiated while appeals and stay petitions are pending before the first appellate authority, particularly concerning the coverage of the petitioner under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that recovery should be stayed as appeals and stay petitions were pending before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The assessee 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 proposition that the issue of coverage under Section 80P needed adjudication. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the revenue regarding the stay of recovery or the merits of the Section 80P issue.

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.9095 OF 2020 PETITIONER: THE KARAMUCK SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.16, KARAMUCH, KANDASANKADAVU P.O., CHAVAKKAD P.O., THRISSUR-680613, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN RESPONDENTS: 1 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) AAYAKAR BHAVAN, S.T.NAGAR, THRISSUR-680001. 2 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(2), THRISSUR, OFFICE OF THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, SHAKTHANTHAMPURAM NAGAR, THRISSUR-680001. 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: W.P.(C) No.9095 of 2020 2

JUDGMENT The writ petition is against the recovery initiated while appeals are 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 years 2012-2013 and 2016-2017. Exhibits P3 and P8 appeals and Exhibits P5 and P10 stay petitions are pending before the first appellate authority. In the circumstance of the case, I am of the opinion that there shall be a stay of recovery till the appeals are 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 pkk

W.P.(C) No.9095 of 2020 3 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 06.12.2018 ALONG WITH THE COMPUTATION SHEET. EXHIBIT P2OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 06.12.2018. EXHIBIT P3OF THE APPEAL DATED 02.01.2019. EXHIBIT P4OF THE ORDER DATED 23.01.2020. EXHIBIT P5OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 29.01.2020. EXHIBIT P6OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 25.10.2019 ALONG WITH COMPUTATION SHEET. EXHIBIT P7OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 25.10.2019. EXHIBIT P8OF THE APPEAL DATED 09.11.2019. EXHIBIT P9OF THE ORDER DATED 14.11.2019. EXHIBIT P10OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 15.11.2019. EXHIBIT P11OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 01.07.2019 IN W.A.NO.1536 OF 2019.

More judgments on Section 80P

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →