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

WP(C)/8355/2020HC KeralaKLHC01021472202017 March 2020Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL3 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to decide the appeal (Ext.P2) within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. The Court further specified that the decision should be taken in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Crucially, the Court directed that the appeal should be decided without insisting on the payment of 20% of the tax demanded, as per a circular issued in 2017. Until the appeal is decided, recovery proceedings initiated pursuant to the assessment order are to be kept in abeyance. The principle established is that appellate authorities should dispose of pending appeals expeditiously, and in certain circumstances, recovery can be stayed pending appeal, referencing a circular for relief on pre-deposit.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Aechoor Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala seeking a direction to dispose of its appeal (Ext.P2) pending before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (third respondent). This appeal was filed against an assessment order (Ext.P1). The petitioner sought a timely decision on its appeal. The revenue was represented by the Income Tax Officer and the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) should be directed to dispose of the pending appeal filed by the petitioner. Assessee's contention: The petitioner sought a direction for the expeditious disposal of its appeal pending before the third respondent. No specific legal arguments or reliance on authorities were recorded in the judgment for the assessee's primary contention. Revenue's contention: The revenue did not record any specific arguments against the direction for disposal of the appeal. The judgment mentions that the learned counsel on both sides were heard.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

1 WP(C).No.8355 OF 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL TUESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 27TH PHALGUNA, 1941 WP(C).No.8355 OF 2020(T) PETITIONER/S: AECHOOR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD EACHUR P.O., KANNUR-670 591, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY P.P.SHAJI. BY ADV. SRI.S.ARUN RAJ RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1 AND TPS, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KANNUR-670 006. 2 THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AAYAKAR BAHVAN, NORTH BLOCK, MANANCHIRA, KOZHIKODE- 673 001. 3 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MANANCHIRA, KOZHIKODE-673 001. OTHER PRESENT: SRI CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17.03.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

2 WP(C).No.8355 OF 2020 JUDGMENT Dated this the 17th day of March 2020 Petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to dispose of Ext.P2 appeal preferred before the third respondent/Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) against the assessment order Ext.P1. 2. 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 Ext.P2 appeal 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 order shall be kept in abeyance. AMIT RAWAL JUDGE SM

3 WP(C).No.8355 OF 2020

Appendix — schedule of exhibits

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 12.12.2019 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE ACT FOR THE AY 2017-18. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2017-18. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION OF STAY FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2017-18. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 26.02.2020 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DISPOSING THE STAY PETITION FOR THE AY 2017-18.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →