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

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/5290/2020HC KeralaKLHC01014573202025 February 2020Author: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of the writ petition. It 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 directed that recovery proceedings and the collection of tax assessed should be kept in abeyance pending the disposal of the appeal. The Court's decision was based on the admission by the revenue's counsel that the facts of the case were substantially similar to those in W.A. No.1536 of 2019, and the Court decided to follow the precedent set by the Division Bench in that case, as well as a Full Bench decision reported in The Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd, v. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Calicut [2019 (2) KHC 287]. No specific issue was left undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, The Shoranur Co-operative Service Bank Ltd., represented by its Secretary, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The petition was directed against the Income Tax Officer and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The petitioner sought a direction for the disposal of its statutory appeal pending before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and for a stay of recovery proceedings. The petitioner relied on a previous judgment of the Division Bench in W.A. No.1536 of 2019, which had directed the disposal of appeals and granted a stay of recovery during the pendency of 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 Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) should be directed to dispose of the statutory appeal filed by the petitioner at the earliest, considering the facts and circumstances of the case? 2. Whether recovery proceedings and collection of tax assessed should be kept in abeyance pending the disposal of the statutory appeal? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner contended that the Division Bench in W.A. No.1536 of 2019 had directed the disposal of appeals and granted a stay of recovery proceedings during the pendency of the appeal, and that the present case was factually similar. Revenue's Contention: The learned Standing Counsel for the respondents admitted that the facts of the case were substantially the same as those in W.A. No.1536 of 2019 and could be followed.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Heard together (2 matters)

WP(C).No.5290 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 TUESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 6TH PHALGUNA, 1941 WP(C).No.5290 OF 2020(I) PETITIONER/S: THE SHORANUR CO-OPERATIVE SERVICE BANK LTD., 20/558 MAIN ROAD, SHORANUR PALAKKAD-679121, KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, SMT V.C.CHANDRIKA BY ADVS. SRI.T.M.SREEDHARAN (SR.) SMT.NISHA JOHN SRI.V.P.NARAYANAN RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, PALAKKAD-678014 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS), AAYAKAR BHAWAN, SAKTHAN THAMPURAM 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.5290 OF 2020 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. 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)/ 2nd respondent to consider and dispose of the statutory appeal filed by the petitioner herein at the earliest taking note of the Full Bench decision reported in The WP(C).No.5290 OF 2020 3 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 uu 27.02.2020 WP(C).No.5290 OF 2020 4 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1

DATED 20.12.2019 FOR AY-2017-18 ALONG WITH DEMAND NOTICE AND COMPUTATION STATEMENT PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P2OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 12.1.2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR AY-2017-18 EXHIBIT P3OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 18.2.2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER FOR AY-2017-18 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P4OF 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 →