KOPPAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/5360/2020HC KeralaKLHC01014578202025 February 2020Author: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI4 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to consider and dispose of the statutory appeal filed by the petitioner at the earliest. The Court also directed 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 Full Bench decision reported in The Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd, v. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Calicut [2019 (2) KHC 287] and the admission by the Revenue's Standing Counsel that the facts were similar to a previously decided case (W.A. No. 1536 of 2019) where similar directions were issued. The Court followed the precedent set by the Division Bench.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Koppam Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The petitioner sought a direction for the disposal of their statutory appeal pending before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and for a stay on recovery proceedings. 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 of recovery during the pendency of appeals. The Revenue's Standing Counsel admitted that the facts of the present case were substantially similar to those in the cited judgment.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) should be directed to dispose of the petitioner's statutory appeal 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 statutory appeal? (Question of procedure) Assessee's Contention: The petitioner relied on the judgment in W.A. No. 1536 of 2019 and connected cases, arguing that the Division Bench had directed the disposal of appeals and granted a stay on recovery proceedings during the pendency of the appeal. The petitioner sought similar relief. Revenue's Contention: The learned Standing Counsel for the respondents admitted that the facts of the case were substantially the same and similar to the facts noted by the Division Bench in W.A. No. 1536 of 2019, implying agreement with the petitioner's reliance on that precedent.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Heard together (2 matters)

WP(C).No.5360 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.5360 OF 2020(T) PETITIONER: KOPPAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. PULASSERI, (PO) KOPPAM, PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD - 679 307, KERALA REPRESENTED BY SHRI V.P. HARINARAYANAN BY ADVS. SRI.T.M.SREEDHARAN (SR.) SRI.V.P.NARAYANAN SMT.DIVYA RAVINDRAN RESPONDENTS: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD - 3, PALAKKAD 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AAYAKAR BHAWAN, SAKTHAN THAMPURAM NAGAR, THRISSUR - 680 001 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.5360 OF 2020(T) 2 JUDGMENT Dated this the 25th day of February 2020 Heard Adv. Nisha John 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.5360 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.5360 OF 2020(T) 4

Appendix — schedule of exhibits

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 18.12.2019 FOR AY 2017-18 ALONG WITH DEMAND NOTICE AND COMPUTATION STATEMENT PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 11.1.2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR AY 2017-18 EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 18.2.2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER FOR AY 2017-18 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION U/S 220 (6) OF THE ACT DATED 18.2.2020 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →