THE MALA BLOCK TOWN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO.R 1086 vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/7505/2020HC KeralaKLHC01019049202011 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 three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. This decision is to be taken in accordance with law, after providing the petitioner an opportunity of hearing. Crucially, the Court directed that the disposal should not insist on the payment of 20% of the tax demanded, referencing a circular from 2017. Furthermore, recovery proceedings pursuant to the assessment order are to be kept in abeyance until a decision is taken on the appeal. The High Court did not decide the merits of the appeal itself, but rather directed its timely disposal.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, The Mala Block Town Co-operative Bank Ltd, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala seeking a direction to dispose of its appeal (Ext.P2) pending before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). This appeal was filed against an assessment order (Ext.P1). The petitioner was represented by its Secretary and counsel. The respondents were the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, and the Income Tax Officer. The assessment year(s) are not specified in the judgment. The dispute concerns the pending appeal and the recovery proceedings initiated based on the 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? (Question of procedure/administrative direction). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner sought a direction for the expeditious disposal of its appeal. The petitioner relied on a circular of 2017 regarding payment of 20% of the tax demanded. Revenue's Contention: The judgment records that the learned counsel for both sides were heard, implying the revenue was represented. However, specific arguments from the revenue are not detailed in the judgment.

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 11TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 21ST PHALGUNA, 1941 WP(C).No.7505 OF 2020(K) PETITIONER/S: THE MALA BLOCK TOWN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO.R 1086 ALOOR.P.O, THRISSUR DISTRICT,REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. BY ADV. SRI.O.D.SIVADAS RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AYAKAR BHAVAN,SHAKTHAN NAGAR, THRISSUR,PIN-680001. 2 THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INICOME TAX, AYAKAR BHAVAN,SHAKTHAN NAGAR, THRISSUR,PIN-680001. 3 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(3),SHAKTAN NAGAR,THRISSUR, PIN-680001. OTHER PRESENT: SRI JOSE JOSEPH SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11.03.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.7505 OF 2020 -2-

JUDGMENT Petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to dispose of Ext.P2 appeal preferred before the first 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 first 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 order shall be kept in abeyance. AMIT RAWAL VV JUDGE

WP(C).No.7505 OF 2020 -3- APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 24.12.2019 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13. EXHIBIT P2OF THE APPEAL DATED 23.01.2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13. EXHIBIT P3OF THE APPLICATION DATED 27.01.2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR STAYING ORDER OF THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13. EXHIBIT P4OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 30.01.2020 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT WITH RESPECT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 EXHIBIT P5OF THE REVIEW PETITION DATED 07.02.2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT WITH RESPECT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 EXHIBIT P6OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 19.02.2020 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT WITH RESPECT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13. //// PA TO JUDGE

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →