THE MANICKAL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO. 1910 vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/5898/2020HC KeralaKLHC01015690202028 February 2020Author: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of the writ petition by directing the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to consider and dispose of the statutory appeal filed by the petitioner at the earliest. The Court also directed that recovery proceedings and the collection of tax assessed be kept in abeyance pending the disposal of the appeal. This decision was based on the petitioner's reliance on a Division Bench judgment in W.A. No.1536 of 2019 and connected cases, and the admission by the revenue's Standing Counsel that the facts were substantially similar. The Court specifically referred to the Full Bench decision in The Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Calicut, as a matter to be taken note of during the disposal of the appeal. The principle established is that where facts are similar to a precedent directing stay of recovery and early disposal of appeal, such relief can be granted.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, The Manickal Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. No. 1910, represented by its Secretary, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The petition was directed against the Income Tax Officer and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The petitioner sought a direction for the disposal of its statutory appeal pending before the second respondent and a stay of recovery proceedings. The petitioner relied on a Division Bench judgment dated 01.07.2019 in W.A No.1536 of 2019 and connected cases, which directed disposal of appeals and granted stay of recovery during the pendency of appeals. The Standing Counsel for the respondents admitted that the facts of the present case were substantially similar to those in the cited Division Bench judgment.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the recovery proceedings and collection of tax assessed should be kept in abeyance pending the disposal of the statutory appeal filed by the petitioner? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner contended that, similar to the facts in W.A. No.1536 of 2019 and connected cases, the Division Bench had directed the disposal of appeals and granted a stay of recovery proceedings during the pendency of the appeal. Therefore, the same relief should be granted in this case. Revenue's Contention: The Standing Counsel for the respondents admitted that the facts of the case were substantially the same and similar to those noted by the Division Bench in W.A. No.1536 of 2019, implying agreement with the petitioner's reliance on that precedent.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
-1- WP(C) NO.5898 OF 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI FRIDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 9TH PHALGUNA, 1941 WP(C).No.5898 OF 2020(J) PETITIONER/S: THE MANICKAL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO. 1910 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PIRAPPANCODE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695607. BY ADVS. SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR SRI.ARJUN RAGHAVAN RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2(3), OFFICE OF THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KAWDIAR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695003. 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN- 695003. SC CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: -2- WP(C) NO.5898 OF 2020

JUDGMENT Heard Adv.T.R Harikumar, for the petitioner and Adv.Christopher Abraham, the Standing Counsel for respondents.

2.

Petitioner refers to and relies on judgment dated 01.07.2019 in W.A No.1536 of 2019 and connected cases to contend that the Division Bench directed disposal of appeal and granted stay of recovery proceedings during the pendency of the appeal.

3.

The learned Standing Counsel admits that the facts of the case are substantially same and similar to the facts noted by the Division Bench in W.A. No.1536 of 2019, hence can be followed. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of directing the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/ 2nd respondent to -3- WP(C) NO.5898 OF 2020 consider and dispose of the statutory appeal filed by the petitioner herein at the earliest taking note of the Full Bench decision reported in The Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd, v. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Calicut 1 and to keep in abeyance recovery proceedings and collection of tax assessed, pending disposal of such appeal. S.V.BHATTI JUDGE JS 1[2019 (2) KHC 287]

-4- WP(C) NO.5898 OF 2020

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2017-2018 DATED 13.12.2019. EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SECTION 156 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT DATED 13.12.2019. EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE ONLINE APPEAL WITH GROUNDS OF APPEAL ALONG WITH COVERING LETTER DATED 20.12.2019, 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 20.12.2019. 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.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →