ARACKAL SERVICE CO OPERATIVE BANK vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/8470/2020HC KeralaKLHC01021979202018 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 Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to decide the appeal (Ext.P2) in accordance with law. The appellate authority was directed to afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and to take a decision within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Crucially, the court directed that the decision should be taken without insisting on the payment of 20% of the tax demanded, as per a circular of 2017. Until a decision is taken on the appeal, recovery proceedings pursuant to the assessment orders are to be kept in abeyance. The ratio decidendi is that the High Court can direct statutory authorities to dispose of pending matters expeditiously, considering relevant circulars and ensuring no undue hardship is caused to the assessee during the pendency of the appeal.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Arackal Service Co-operative Bank, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala seeking a direction to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to dispose of its appeal. The appeal was filed against an assessment order passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1 and TPS, Kollam. The petitioner sought a speedy resolution of its appeal, which was pending before the appellate authority. The assessment year(s) are not specified in the judgment. The procedural history involves the filing of an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) against an assessment order.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should direct the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to dispose of the pending appeal filed by the petitioner? The petitioner argued that its appeal was pending and sought a direction for its expeditious disposal. The revenue did not record any specific arguments against the direction for disposal, but the court's order implies their presence as parties to the writ petition. The court considered the pendency of the appeal and the need for a decision in accordance with the law. The core issue revolves around the court's power to direct a statutory authority to expedite the disposal of a pending appeal.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
WP(C).No.8470 OF 2020(G) 1 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.8470 OF 2020(G) PETITIONER/S: ARACKAL SERVICE CO OPERATIVE BANK ARACKAL, EDAYAM P.O, KOLLAM 691 532, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY BY ADVS. SRI.R.SUNIL KUMAR SMT.A.SALINI LAL RESPONDENT/S: 1 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AAYYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 003 2 INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 AND TPS, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, NEAR KARBALA JUNCTION, RAILWAY STATION ROAD, KOLLAM 691 001 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: WP(C).No.8470 OF 2020(G) 2

JUDGMENT Petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to dispose of Ext.P2 appeal preferred before the 1st respondent/Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) against the assessment order, Exts.P1. 2. Having heard the learned counsel on both sides, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 1st respondent to take a decision on Ext.P2 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 orders shall be kept in abeyance. AMIT RAWAL JUDGE Jm/

WP(C).No.8470 OF 2020(G) 3 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2017-18 EXHIBIT P2OF THE APPEAL IN FORM NUMBER 35 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2017-18 EXHIBIT P3OF THE STAY PETITION PREFERRED ALONG WITH EXHIBIT P2 EXHIBIT P4OF THE DEMAND NOTICE UNDER SECTION 156 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT DATED 19/12/2019 EXHIBIT P5OF THE STAY ORDER ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT IN FAVOUR OF PETITIONER IN THE APPEAL PREFERRED FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2015-16 AND 2016-17.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →