VELLIAMATTOM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED, vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-II,
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court disposed of the writ petition with a direction to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to decide the appeals within three months from the date of receipt of the judgment. The Court specified that this decision should be taken in accordance with the law, after providing a hearing to the petitioner. 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 issued in 2017. Furthermore, recovery proceedings pursuant to the assessment orders were to be kept in abeyance until a decision was taken on the appeal. The Court did not decide on the merits of the assessment orders themselves, but rather on the procedural aspect of their disposal.
What were the facts?
The petitioner, Velliamattom Service Co-operative Bank Limited, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala seeking a direction for the disposal of appeals and interim applications filed before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). These appeals were against assessment orders passed by the Income Tax Officer. The petitioner sought a directive for the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to decide the pending matters.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) should be directed to dispose of the pending appeals and interim applications filed by the petitioner? The petitioner contended that their appeals and interim applications before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) were pending and sought a direction for their expeditious disposal. The revenue did not record any specific arguments in the judgment.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
JUDGMENT Petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to dispose of Exts.P2 and P2(a) appeals and Exts.P3 and P3(a) interim
applications
preferred
before
the 1st respondent/Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) against the assessment orders Exts.P1 and P1(a).
Having heard the learned counsel on both sides, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 1st respondent to take a decision on Exts.P2 and P2(a) appeals 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 orders shall be kept in abeyance. AMIT RAWAL nak JUDGE
WP(C).No.6190 OF 2020(W) 3 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR AY 2011-12 DATED 27.12.2016. EXHIBIT P1(A)OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR AY 2017-18 DATED 19.12.2019. EXHIBIT P2OF APPEAL FILED IN FORM 35 FOR AY 2011-12 DATED 1.2.2017. EXHIBIT P2(A)OF APPEAL FILED IN FORM 35 FOR AY 2017-18 DATED 30.1.2020. EXHIBIT P3OF STAY APPLICATION FOR AY 2011-12 DATED 20.2.2020. EXHIBIT P3(A)OF STAY APPLICATION FOR AY 2017-18 DATED 21.1.2020. EXHIBIT P4OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE DIVISION BENCH IN WRIT APPEAL 1529/2019 DATED 1.7.2019. //// P.A TO JUDGE
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Ganesh Trimbak Saraf And Another vs. The State Of Maharashtra And AnotherBombay · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S. Vajram Infra Material Industries vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Tyre Center vs. The Superintendent Of CGSTAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Monolith Resorts Private Limited vs. The CommissionerUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Sutlej Textiles And Industries Limited vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 26 Oct 2026
