THALAYOLAPARAMBU FARMERS SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.278 vs. THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES

WP(C)/5873/2020HC KeralaKLHC01015513202027 February 2020Author: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI4 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to consider and dispose of the statutory appeal filed by the petitioner at the earliest. The Court also ordered that recovery proceedings and the collection of tax assessed should be kept in abeyance pending the disposal of the appeal. This decision was based on the petitioner's reliance on a previous judgment in W.A. No.1536 of 2019 and the admission by the revenue's counsel that the facts were substantially similar. The Court specifically referred to the Full Bench decision in The Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd, v. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Calicut [2019 (2) KHC 287] as a guiding precedent. The ratio decidendi is that where facts are similar to a prior binding precedent, and the revenue does not object, similar relief regarding expeditious disposal of appeal and stay of recovery should be granted.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Thalolaparambu Farmers Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. No. 278, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The petitioner sought directions for the disposal of its statutory appeal pending before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The petitioner relied on a previous judgment dated 01.07.2019 in W.A No.1536 of 2019 and connected cases, where a Division Bench had directed the disposal of appeals and granted a stay on recovery proceedings during the pendency of the appeals. The Standing Counsel for the respondents admitted that the facts of the present case were substantially similar to those in the cited writ appeal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the statutory appeal filed by the petitioner should be considered and disposed of at the earliest by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)? (Question of procedure and administrative efficiency) 2. Whether recovery proceedings and collection of tax assessed should be kept in abeyance pending the disposal of the statutory appeal? (Question of interim relief and financial burden) Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that based on the Division Bench's order in W.A. No.1536 of 2019, their statutory appeal should be disposed of expeditiously, and recovery proceedings should be stayed during the pendency of the appeal. Revenue's Contention: The Standing Counsel for the respondents admitted that the facts were similar to the case cited by the petitioner and did not oppose the relief sought.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Heard together (2 matters)

WP(C).No.5873 OF 2020

W.A No.1536 of 2019

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI THURSDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 8TH PHALGUNA, 1941 WP(C).No.5873 OF 2020(H) PETITIONER: THALAYOLAPARAMBU FARMERS SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.278 THALAYOLAARAMBU P. O., KOTTAYAM - 686605, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY SUNIL T. R. BY ADVS. DR.K.P.PRADEEP SRI.T.T.BIJU SMT.T.THASMI RESPONDENTS: 1 THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI - 110 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN. 2 INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2, INCOME TAX OFFICE, PUBLIC LIBRARY BUILDING, SASTRI ROAD, KOTTAYAM - 686 608. 3 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) INCOME TAX OFFICE, SASTRI ROAD, KOTTAYAM - 686 608. BY SRI. JOSE JOSEPH, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.5873 OF 2020(H) 2 JUDGMENT Dated this the 27th day of February 2020 Heard Dr. K.P. Pradeep, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Jose Joseph, the learned Standing Counsel for respondents. 2. Petitioner refers to and relies on judgment dated 01.07.2019 in W.A No.1536 of 2019 and connected cases to contend that the Division Bench directed disposal of appeal and granted stay of recovery proceedings during the pendency of the appeal. 3. The learned Standing Counsel admits that the facts of the case are substantially same and similar to the facts noted by the Division Bench in W.A. No.1536 of 2019, hence can be followed. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of directing the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/ 3rd respondent to consider and dispose of the statutory appeal filed by the petitioner herein, at the earliest, taking note of the Full WP(C).No.5873 OF 2020(H) 3 Bench decision reported in The Mavilayi Service Co- operative Bank Ltd, v. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Calicut [2019 (2) KHC 287] and to keep in abeyance recovery proceedings and collection of tax assessed, pending disposal of such appeal. SD/- S.V.BHATTI JUDGE DCS WP(C).No.5873 OF 2020(H) 4 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE RETURN OF INCOME DATED 20.3.2018 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2017-18 IN PAN - AAGAT7191L WITH ACKNOWLEDGEMENT NO.468084501200318. EXHIBIT P2

OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO.ITBA/AST/S/143(3)/2019-20/1023360424(1) DATED 29.12.2019 ISSUED FOR THE YEAR 2017- 18 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2 (a)OF THE RECTIFICATION ORDER NO.ITBA/REC/S/154-1/2019-20/1024820227(1) DATED 5.2.2020 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3OF THE APPEAL DATED 22.2.2020 FILED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2017-18. EXHIBIT P4OF THE DEMAND NOTICE NO.ITBA/AST/S/156/2019-20/1023360442(1) IN PAN - AAGAT7191L DATED 29.12.2019 FOR THE YEAR 2017-18 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P5OF THE STAY APPLICATION DATED 24.02.2020 BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT IN EXT. P3 APPEAL.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →