PARAVUR REGIONAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO.1649 vs. THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES

WP(C)/6170/2020HC KeralaKLHC01016195202002 March 2020Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL3 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the 3rd respondent, 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. The disposal is to be completed within three months from the date of receiving 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, 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. The court did not adjudicate on the merits of the assessment order or the appeal itself.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Paravur Regional Co-operative Bank Ltd, filed an appeal (Ext.P2) before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (3rd respondent) against an assessment order (Ext.P1). The petitioner approached the High Court of Kerala seeking a direction for the disposal of this pending appeal. The assessment order was passed by the Income Tax Officer (2nd respondent), and the Central Board of Direct Taxes (1st respondent) is also a party. The dispute pertains to an income tax demand arising from the assessment order.

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 expeditious disposal of their appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). They rely on a circular of 2017 regarding the payment of 20% of the tax demanded as a condition for appeal. The petitioner implicitly argues for a decision on their appeal without undue delay and potentially without strict adherence to pre-deposit conditions if the circular permits. Revenue's Contention: The judgment records no specific contentions from the revenue. However, the court's direction implies that the revenue's position on the appeal's pendency and recovery proceedings was considered.

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 02ND DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 12TH PHALGUNA, 1941 WP(C).No.6170 OF 2020(U) PETITIONER: PARAVUR REGIONAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO.1649 HEAD OFFICE, RAILWAY STATION ROAD, KURUMANDAL, PARAVUR P. O., KOLLAM - 691 301, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, C. PRASAD. BY ADVS. DR.K.P.PRADEEP SMT.T.THASMI RESPONDENTS: 1 THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI - 110 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN. 2 INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 4, KOLLAM, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, INCOME TAX OFFICE, NEAR KARBALA JUNCTION, RAILWAY STATION ROAD, KOLLAM - 691 001. 3 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, INCOME TAX OFFICE, KOWADIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 003. SRI CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.03.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.6170 OF 2020(U) 2

JUDGMENT Petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to dispose of Ext.P2 appeal preferred before the 3rd 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 3rd 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 nak JUDGE

WP(C).No.6170 OF 2020(U) 3 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO.ITBA/AST/S/143(3)/2019- 20/1021646530(1) DATED 4.12.2019 ISSUED FOR THE YEAR 2017-18 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2OF THE APPEAL DATED 13.1.2020 FILED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2017-18. EXHIBIT P3OF THE DEMAND NOTICE NO.ITBA/AST/S/156/2019-20/1021646653(1) DATED 4.12.2019 FOR THE YEAR 2017-18 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4OF THE STAY APPLICATION FILED ON 12.2.2020 BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT IN EXT. P2 APPEAL. //// P.A TO JUDGE

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →