GURUVAYUR VYAPARI VYAVASAYI CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD NO. R-1325 vs. THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/8607/2020HC KeralaKLHC01022090202018 March 2020Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to decide the appeal (Ext.P2) within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. This decision is to be made in accordance with the law, after providing the petitioner an opportunity of hearing. Crucially, the Court ordered that the decision should be made without insisting on the payment of 20% of the tax demanded, as per a circular of 2017. Furthermore, recovery proceedings pursuant to the assessment order were to be kept in abeyance until a decision was taken on the appeal. The Court did not decide the merits of the assessment order or the appeal itself, but rather focused on the procedural aspect of timely disposal.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Guruvayur Vyapari Vyavasaayi Co-operative Society Ltd, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The petition sought a direction for the expeditious disposal of an appeal filed before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). This appeal was preferred against an assessment order. The assessment order was passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward 1 and TPS, Guruvayoor. The respondents in the writ petition were the Central Board of Direct Taxes, the Income Tax Officer, and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The procedural history involves the filing of an appeal against an assessment order, and the subsequent writ petition seeking its disposal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to a direction for the disposal of their appeal pending before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)? (Question of procedure) Assessee's Contention: The petitioner sought a direction for the disposal of their appeal, implying a grievance regarding the delay in adjudication. They relied on a circular of 2017, suggesting it might pertain to the conditions for hearing appeals or stay of demand. Revenue's Contention: The judgment records that the parties were heard. While the revenue's specific arguments are not detailed, their presence and participation in the hearing indicate they were opposing or responding to the petitioner's prayer for a direction.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
WP(C).No.8607 OF 2020(A) 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.8607 OF 2020(A) PETITIONER/S: GURUVAYUR VYAPARI VYAVASAYI CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD NO. R-1325 INNER RING ROAD, GURUVAYUR P.O., THRISSUR-680101, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY SONI S.SEKHAR. BY ADVS. DR.K.P.PRADEEP SMT.T.THASMI SMT.NOORUNISSA K.A. RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE MINISTRY OF FINANCE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110001, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN. 2 INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1 AND TPS, GURUVAYOOR, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, CITY PALZA, INCOME TAX OFFICE, WEST NADA, GURUVAYOOR, THRISSUR-680101. 3 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), THRISSUR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, S.T.NAGAR, MUNICIPAL OFFICE ROAD, THRISSUR-680001. SRI JOSE JOSEPH 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.8607 OF 2020(A) 2

JUDGMENT Petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to dispose of Ext.P2 appeal preferred before the 3rd respondent/Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) against the assessment order, Ext.P1. 2. Having heard the learned counsel on both sides, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 3rd 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.8607 OF 2020(A) 3 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO.ITBA/AST/S/143(3)/2019-20/1022591287(1) DATED 18.12.2019 ISSUED FOR THE YEAR 2017- 18 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2OF THE APPEAL DATED 16.1.2020 FILED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2017-18. EXHIBIT P3OF THE DEMAND NOTICE NO.ITBA/AST/S/156/2019-20/1022591341(1) DATED 18.12.2019 FOR THE YEAR 2017-18 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4OF THE DEMAND NOTICE NO.ITBA/COM/F/17/2019-20/1024296064(1) DATED 27.01.2020 FOR THE YEAR 2017-18 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P5OF THE STAY APPLICATION FILED ON 07.02.2020 BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT IN EXT.P2 APPEAL.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →