KAVALANGAD SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.1348, vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/7042/2020HC KeralaKLHC01018625202009 March 2020Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the second respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), to decide the appeal (Ext.P3) in accordance with the law. This decision must be made after providing the petitioner an opportunity of hearing, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Crucially, the Court ordered that the appeal should be decided without insisting on the payment of 20% of the tax demanded, as per a circular issued in 2017. Furthermore, recovery proceedings initiated pursuant to the assessment order are to be kept in abeyance until a decision is taken on the appeal. The High Court did not decide the merits of the appeal itself, but rather directed its expeditious disposal.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Kavalangad Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., filed an appeal (Ext.P3) before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (second respondent) against an assessment order (Ext.P1) passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Aluva (first respondent). The petitioner approached the High Court of Kerala seeking a direction for the disposal of this pending appeal. The assessment year(s) and the amount in dispute are not specified in the judgment. The procedural history involves the filing of the appeal before the CIT(A) and the subsequent writ petition seeking its expeditious disposal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should direct the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to dispose of the pending appeal filed by the petitioner? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner seeks a direction for the disposal of their appeal before the second respondent. No specific arguments or reliance on authorities are recorded for the petitioner regarding the grounds of appeal or the delay. Revenue's Contention: The revenue's contentions are not recorded in the judgment. The judgment indicates that the parties were heard, but the specific arguments of the revenue are not detailed.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL MONDAY, THE 09TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 19TH PHALGUNA, 1941 WP(C).No.7042 OF 2020(E) PETITIONER/S: KAVALANGAD SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.1348, KAVALANGAD, NELLIMATTOM P.O., ERNAKULAM-686693, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. BY ADVS. SRI.C.A.JOJO SMT.SWATHY S. RESPONDENT/S: 1 INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, ALUVA P.O., ALUVA-683101. 2 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-2, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COCHIN-682018. OTHER PRESENT: SRI CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09.03.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.7042 OF 2020(E) 2

JUDGMENT 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 sab JUDGE

WP(C).No.7042 OF 2020(E) 3 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 AOF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR AY 2017-18 DATED 29/12/2019 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2 AOF THE DEMAND NOTICE U/S. 156 DATED 29/12/2019 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3 AOF THE APPEAL FOR AY 2017- 18 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 27/01/2020. EXHIBIT P4 AOF THE LETTER OF DEMAND DATED 24/02/2020 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →