THE VELLARAKKAD SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO 154, vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)

WP(C)/8512/2020HC KeralaKLHC01021987202018 March 2020Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL4 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to decide the pending appeals (Exts.P3, P8, P13 and P18) in accordance with the law. The court mandated that an opportunity of hearing be provided to the petitioner before making a decision. Crucially, the disposal was to be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. The court also specified that the Commissioner should not insist on the payment of 20% of the tax demanded, referencing a circular from 2017. Furthermore, recovery proceedings pursuant to the assessment orders were to be kept in abeyance until a decision was taken on the appeals. No issues were expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, The Vellarakkad Service Co-operative Bank Ltd, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala seeking a direction to dispose of several appeals and interim applications filed before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). These appeals were against assessment orders passed by the Income Tax Officer. The petitioner sought a speedy resolution of their pending appeals before the first respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The specific assessment orders and the corresponding appeals and interim applications are identified by exhibit numbers (P1, P3, P5, P6, P8, P10, P11, P13, P15, P16, P18, P20). The matter was heard by the High Court on March 18, 2020.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should direct the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to dispose of the pending appeals and interim applications filed by the petitioner? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner, The Vellarakkad Service Co-operative Bank Ltd, sought a direction from the High Court to expedite the disposal of their appeals and interim applications pending before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The petitioner implicitly argued for a timely resolution of their tax disputes. Revenue's Contention: The judgment records that the learned counsel on both sides were heard. However, the specific contentions of the revenue are not detailed in the provided text. The court's direction to dispose of the appeals without insisting on 20% of the tax demanded suggests a potential issue or practice related to pre-deposit requirements, but the revenue's specific stance on this is not recorded.

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.8512 OF 2020(L) PETITIONER/S: THE VELLARAKKAD SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO 154, P.O.VELLARAKKAD, THRISSUR DIST 680 584, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AAYAKAR BHAVAN. S.T NAGAR, THRISSUR-680 001. 2 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, GURUVAYUR, OFFICE OF THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WEST NADA, GURUVAYOOR-680 101 OTHER PRESENT: SRI JOSE JJOSEPH SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18.03.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.8512 OF 2020(L) 2

JUDGMENT Petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to dispose of Exts.P3, P8, P13 and P18 appeals and Exts.P5, P10 and P15 and P20 interim applications preferred before the first respondent/Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) against the assessment orders Exts.P1, P6, P11 and P16. 2. Having heard the learned counsel on both sides, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the first respondent to take a decision on appeals, Exts.P3, P8, P13 and P18, 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 orders shall be kept in abeyance. AMIT RAWAL JUDGE JM/

WP(C).No.8512 OF 2020(L) 3 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 1.3.2016 ALONG WITH COMPUTATION SHEET EXHIBIT P2OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 1.3.2016 EXHIBIT P3OF THE APPEAL DATED 14.6.2016 EXHIBIT P4OF THE ORDER DATED 19.10.2016 EXHIBIT P5OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 30.11.2016 EXHIBIT P6OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 30.11.2017 ALONG WITH COMPUTATION SHEET EXHIBIT P7OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 30.11.2017 EXHIBIT P8OF THE APPEAL DATED 2.1.2018 EXHIBIT P9OF THE ORDER DATED 15.10.2019 EXHIBIT P10OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 16.10.2019 EXHIBIT P11OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 30.11.2017 ALONG WITH COMPUTATION SHEET EXHIBIT P12OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 30.11.2017 EXHIBIT P13OF THE APPEAL DATED 2.1.2018 EXHIBIT P14OF THE ORDER DATED 15.10.2019 EXHIBIT P15OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 16.10.2019 EXHIBIT P16OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 22.11.2019 EXHIBIT P17OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 22.11.2019 EXHIBIT P18OF THE APPEAL DATED 26.12.2019

WP(C).No.8512 OF 2020(L) 4 EXHIBIT P19OF THE ORDER DATED 20.1.2020 EXHIBIT P20OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 28.1.2020 EXHIBIT P21OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 1.7.2019 IN WA NO 1536 OF 2019

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →