THE AYIROOR VILLAGE SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.4267, vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/7714/2020HC KeralaKLHC01020174202016 March 2020Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition with a direction to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (second respondent) to decide the appeal (Ext.P3) in accordance with law. The Tribunal mandated that an opportunity of hearing be provided to the petitioner. The decision on the appeal must be taken within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Crucially, the Court directed that the disposal should not insist on the payment of 20% of the tax demanded, referencing a circular from 2017. Furthermore, recovery proceedings pursuant to the assessment order are to be kept in abeyance until a decision is taken on the appeal. No specific issue was left undecided; the court directed the appeal's disposal.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, The Ayiroor Village Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. No. 4267, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala seeking a direction for the disposal of its appeal (Ext.P3) before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (second respondent). This appeal was filed against an assessment order (Ext.P1) passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(5) (first respondent). The petitioner sought a directive for the expeditious disposal of the appeal. The assessment year(s) are not specified in the judgment. The dispute pertains to tax demanded by the Income Tax Officer.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should issue a writ of mandamus directing the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioner? (Question of procedure/administrative law) Assessee's Contention: The petitioner bank sought a direction for the expeditious disposal of its appeal against the assessment order. The petitioner relied on a circular of 2017 regarding the payment of 20% of the tax demanded. Revenue's Contention: The judgment records that the learned counsel for both sides were heard, implying the revenue was represented and likely had an opportunity to present its stance, though specific arguments are not detailed.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Heard together (3 matters)

WP(C).No.7714 OF 2020
W.A.NO.1639 OF 2019
WP(C) NO.4433 OF 2020

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 AMIT RAWAL MONDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 26TH PHALGUNA, 1941 WP(C).No.7714 OF 2020(L) PETITIONER: THE AYIROOR VILLAGE SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.4267, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, ELAKAMON P.O., VARKALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695611. BY ADVS. SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR SRI.ARJUN RAGHAVAN RESPONDENTS 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(5),OFFICE OF THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695003. 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695003. 3 THE GENERAL MANAGER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK, HEAD OFFICE, EAST FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695001. SRI CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM SC SRI. THOMAS ABRAHAM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16.03.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

2 WP(C).No.7714 OF 2020(L) JUDGMENT Dated this the 16th day of March 2020 Petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to dispose of Ext.P3 appeal preferred before the second 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 second respondent to take a decision on Ext.P3 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 hmh

3 WP(C).No.7714 OF 2020(L)

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2017-2018 DATED 16.12.2019. EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SECTION 156 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT DATED 16.12.2019. EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE ONLINE APPEAL DATED 21.12.2019, FILED AGAINST EXT-P1 ASSESSMENT ORDER, BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN EXT-P3 APPEAL DATED 07.01.2020. EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 19.07.2019 IN W.A.NO.1639 OF 2019. EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 17.02.2020 IN WP(C) NO.4433 OF 2020. RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS: NIL

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →