CHANNAPETTA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.358, vs. THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES,

WP(C)/6862/2020HC KeralaKLHC01018111202006 March 2020Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL3 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the third respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), to decide the pending appeals (Exts.P2, P2(a), and P2(b)) within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. This decision was to be made in accordance with the law, after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Crucially, the court ordered that the Commissioner should not insist on the payment of 20% of the tax demanded, referencing a circular from 2017. Furthermore, recovery proceedings initiated pursuant to the assessment orders were to be kept in abeyance until a decision was taken on the appeals. The court did not decide the merits of the appeals themselves, but rather directed their expeditious disposal.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Channapetta Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The petitioner sought a direction for the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to dispose of pending appeals and interim applications. These appeals and applications were filed against assessment orders issued by the Income Tax Officer. The assessment orders are referred to as Ext.P1 series, and the appeals and interim applications are referred to as Ext.P2, P2(a), P2(b) and Ext.P4, P4(a), P4(b) respectively. The petitioner sought a speedy resolution of these matters pending before the third respondent.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) should be directed to dispose of the pending appeals and interim applications filed by the petitioner against the assessment orders. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner bank sought a direction from the High Court to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to expedite the disposal of its appeals and interim applications. The petitioner relied on a circular of 2017, implying it should not be insisted upon to pay 20% of the tax demanded for the appeal to be considered. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the revenue authorities. However, the court's direction implies that the revenue's usual recovery proceedings were subject to the outcome of the appeal.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

WP(C).No.6862 OF 2020(G) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL FRIDAY, THE 06TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 16TH PHALGUNA, 1941 WP(C).No.6862 OF 2020(G) PETITIONER/S: CHANNAPETTA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.358, SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BUILDING, CHANNAPETTA, ANCHAL, KOLLAM-691306, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY SARAMMA PHILIP. BY ADVS. DR.K.P.PRADEEP SMT.T.THASMI 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, KOLLAM, OFFICE OF THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RAILWAY STATION ROAD, NEAR KARBALA JUNCTION, KOLLAM-691001. 3 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, INCOME TAX OFFICE, KOWADIAR, THIRUVANNTHAPURAM-695003. SRI CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.03.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.6862 OF 2020(G) 2

JUDGMENT Petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to dispose of Exts.P2, P2(a) and P2 (b) appeals and Exts.P4 and P4(a) and P4 (b) interim applications preferred before the third respondent/Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) against Ext.P1 series of assessment orders.

Having heard the learned counsel on both sides, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the third respondent to take a decision on Exts.P2, P2 (a) and P2 (b) appeals 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.6862 OF 2020(G) 3 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO.AABAC2748R DATED 29.12.2016 ISSUED FOR THE YEAR 2011-12 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P1(A)OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO.AABAC2748R DATED 29.12.2016 ISSUED FOR THE YEAR 2012-13 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P1(B)OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO.AABAC2748R DATED 29.12.2016 ISSUED FOR THE YEAR 2013-14 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2OF THE APPEAL DATED 26.2.2020 FILED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12. EXHIBIT P2(A)OF THE APPEAL DATED 25.2.2020 FILED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13. EXHIBIT P2(B)OF THE APPEAL DATED 26.2.2020 FILED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14. EXHIBIT P3OF THE DEMAND NOTICE NO.PAN AABAC2748R/2011-12 DATED 29.12.2016 FOR THE YEAR 2011-12 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3(A)OF THE DEMAND NOTICE NO.PAN AABAC2748R/2012-13 DATED 20.4.2018 FOR THE YEAR 2012-13 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3(B)OF THE DEMAND NOTICE NO.PAN AABAC2748R/2013-14 DATED 20.4.2018 FOR THE YEAR 2013-14 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4OF THE STAY APPLICATION FIELD ON 26.2.2020 BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT IN EX.P2 APPEAL. EXHIBIT P4(A)OF THE STAY APPLICATION FIELD ON 26.2.2020 BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT IN EX.P2(A) APPEAL. EXHIBIT P4(B)OF THE STAY APPLICATION FIELD ON 26.2.2020 BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT IN EX.P2(B) APPEAL.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →