KARAYAVATTAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO. F 793 vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/5356/2020HC KeralaKLHC01014512202025 February 2020Author: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI4 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

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 admission by the revenue's counsel that the facts were similar to those in a previous Division Bench judgment (W.A. No. 1536 of 2019) and the reliance placed by the petitioner on that judgment. The Court explicitly referred to and relied upon the Full Bench decision in The Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd, v. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Calicut [2019 (2) KHC 287]. No issues were left undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Karayavattam Service Co-operative Bank Ltd, 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 Division Bench judgment in W.A. No. 1536 of 2019 and connected cases, which directed the disposal of appeals and granted a stay on recovery proceedings during the pendency of the appeal. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1 and TPS, Guruvayoor, and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Thrissur, were the respondents. The court noted that the facts of the present case were substantially similar to those in the cited Division Bench judgment.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) should be directed to dispose of the statutory appeal filed by the petitioner at the earliest? (Question of procedure) 2. Whether recovery proceedings and collection of tax assessed should be kept in abeyance pending the disposal of the appeal? (Question of procedure) The petitioner contended that a Division Bench judgment in W.A. No. 1536 of 2019 and connected cases directed the disposal of appeals and granted a stay on recovery proceedings during the pendency of the appeal, and that this precedent should be followed. The revenue, through its learned Standing Counsel, admitted that the facts of the case were substantially the same as those in the cited Division Bench judgment and could be followed.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Heard together (2 matters)

WP(C).No.5356 OF 2020

W.A No.1536 of 2019

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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI TUESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 6TH PHALGUNA, 1941 WP(C).No.5356 OF 2020(T) PETITIONER: KARAYAVATTAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO. F 793 KARAYAVATTAM.P.O, THRISSUR-680567, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY IN CHARGE. BY ADVS. SRI.C.A.JOJO SMT.SWATHY S. RESPONDENTS: 1 INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 AND TPS, GURUVAYOOR, THRISSUR-680101. 2 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)- OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX, SAKTHAN NAGAR, THRISSUR-680001. BY SRI. JOSE JOSEPH, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No.5356 OF 2020(T) 2 JUDGMENT Dated this the 25th day of February 2020 Heard Sri. C.A. Jojo, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Jose Joseph, the learned Standing Counsel for respondents.

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.

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)/ 2nd 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.5356 OF 2020(T) 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. S.V.BHATTI JUDGE DCS

WP(C).No.5356 OF 2020(T) 4

Appendix — schedule of exhibits

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR AY 2012-13 DATED 25.11.2019 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE U/S 156 DATED 25.11.2019 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FOR AY 2012-13 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 17.12.2019 EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 31.12.2019 FOR 20% OF TAX.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →