PONNANI SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED NO.4841 vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)

WP(C)/5877/2020HC KeralaKLHC01015129202027 February 2020Author: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI4 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), the first respondent, to consider and dispose of the statutory appeal filed by the petitioner at the earliest. The Court further directed that recovery proceedings and the collection of tax assessed should be kept in abeyance pending the disposal of the appeal. This decision was made taking note of the Full Bench decision in The Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Calicut [2019 (2) KHC 287] and the admission by the revenue that the facts were similar to a previous Division Bench judgment (W.A. No. 1536 of 2019). The principle is that where facts are similar to a precedent and the revenue concedes, the court will direct expeditious disposal of the appeal and stay recovery.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Ponnani Service Co-operative Bank Limited, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The petitioner sought directions for the disposal of its statutory appeal pending before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The petitioner relied on a previous Division Bench judgment in W.A. No. 1536 of 2019, which directed the disposal of appeals and granted a stay on recovery proceedings during the pendency of the appeal. The Income Tax Officer, Ward (4), Tirur, was the second respondent. The learned 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 Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) should be directed to dispose of the statutory appeal filed by the petitioner at the earliest, considering the facts and circumstances of the case? 2. Whether recovery proceedings and collection of tax assessed should be kept in abeyance pending the disposal of the statutory appeal? Assessee's Contentions: The petitioner contended that a Division Bench of the High Court, in W.A. No. 1536 of 2019 and connected cases, had directed the disposal of appeals and granted a stay of recovery proceedings during the pendency of the appeal. The petitioner relied on this judgment to support its plea for similar directions. Revenue's Contentions: The learned Standing Counsel for the respondents admitted that the facts of the present case were substantially the same and similar to the facts noted by the Division Bench in W.A. No. 1536 of 2019, and therefore, the said judgment could be followed.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Heard together (2 matters)

WP(C).No.5877 OF 2020

W.A No.1536 of 2019

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI THURSDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 8TH PHALGUNA, 1941 WP(C).No.5877 OF 2020(H) PETITIONER: PONNANI SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED NO.4841 PONNANI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. BY ADV. SRI.O.D.SIVADAS RESPONDENTS: 1 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AYAKAR BHAVAN, KOZHIKODE-673001. 2 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD(4), TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-676001. BY SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No.5877 OF 2020(H) 2 JUDGMENT Dated this the 27th day of February 2020 Heard Sri. O. D. Sivadas, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Christopher Abraham, the learned Standing Counsel for respondents.

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.

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)/ 1st respondent to consider and dispose of the statutory appeal filed by the petitioner herein, at the earliest, taking note of the Full

WP(C).No.5877 OF 2020(H) 3 Bench decision reported in The Mavilayi Service Co- operative Bank Ltd, v. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Calicut [2019 (2) KHC 287] and to keep in abeyance recovery proceedings and collection of tax assessed, pending disposal of such appeal. S.V.BHATTI JUDGE DCS

WP(C).No.5877 OF 2020(H) 4

Appendix — schedule of exhibits

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 23.02.2016 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE PERIOD 2008-09. EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 29.12.2016 ISSUED BY THE2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE PERIOD 2009-10. EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT CARD WITH RESPECT TO THE APPEAL SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT AGAINST EXT.P1 ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE PERIOD 2008-09. EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE PERIOD 2009-10. EXHIBIT P5 PROCEEDING OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 11.12.2019 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DEMANDING TAX.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →