AROOKUTTY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)

WP(C)/6291/2020HC KeralaKLHC01016573202003 March 2020Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL3 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 decide the appeal (Ext.P2) in accordance with the law. This decision is to 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 directed that the decision should be made without insisting on the payment of 20% of the tax demanded, as per 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. The ratio decidendi is that appellate authorities should dispose of pending matters expeditiously, and recovery can be stayed pending appeal, especially when a circular provides for such relief.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Arookutty Service Co-operative Society Ltd., filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala seeking a direction for the disposal of its appeal (Ext.P2) and stay petition (Ext.P4) pending before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The appeal was filed against an assessment order (Ext.P1) passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward 1 and T.P.S, Alappuzha. The assessment year(s) are not specified in the judgment. The procedural history involves the filing of the appeal and stay petition before the first respondent, and the subsequent writ petition seeking 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 and stay petition filed by the petitioner? (Question of procedure/administrative direction). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner seeks a direction for the expeditious disposal of its appeal and stay petition. The judgment does not record specific arguments made by the petitioner's counsel beyond this request. Revenue's Contention: The judgment records that the matter was heard by the learned counsel on both sides, implying the revenue was represented. However, the specific arguments or contentions of the revenue are not detailed in the judgment.

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 TUESDAY, THE 03RD DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 13TH PHALGUNA, 1941 WP(C).No.6291 OF 2020(J) PETITIONER/S: AROOKUTTY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. REPRSENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, AROOKUTTY SCS NO.1008, AROOKUTTY.P.O, CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA-688535 BY ADVS. SRI.V.G.ARUN (K/795/2004) SMT.V.JAYA RAGI SRI.R.HARIKRISHNAN (KAMBISSERIL) SRI.NEERAJ NARAYAN SHRI.SARATH SUKUMARAN RESPONDENT/S: 1 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) BAKER HILLS KOTTAYAM-686002 2 INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1 AND T.P.S, ALAPPUZHA, ARATTUKULANKARA COMPLEXZ, A.N. PURAM, ALAPPUZHA-688011 SRI JOSE JOSEPH SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.03.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.6291 OF 2020(J) 2

JUDGMENT Petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to dispose of Ext.P2 appeal along with Ext.P4 stay petition preferred before the first 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 first 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 Jm/

WP(C).No.6291 OF 2020(J) 3 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 12.12.2019 ALONG WITH DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SECTION 156 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT DATED 12.12.2019 FOR THE YEAR 2017-18 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 13.01.2020 FILED FOR THE YEAR 2017-18 BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P3 AOF THE ORDER DATED 21.01.2020 ISSUE BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR STAY DATED 10.02.2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →