THE CHADAYAMANGALAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.1868 vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court 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 assessed tax be kept in abeyance pending the disposal of the appeal. This decision was based on the admission by the revenue's counsel that the facts of the case were substantially similar to those in a previous Division Bench judgment (W.A. No. 1536 of 2019) and the reliance placed by the petitioner on that judgment. The Court also took 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]. The operative direction is to dispose of the appeal expeditiously and stay recovery during its pendency.
What were the facts?
The petitioner, The Chadayamangalath Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The petitioner sought a direction for the disposal of its statutory appeal pending before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and a stay on recovery proceedings. The petitioner relied on a previous judgment of the Division Bench in W.A. No. 1536 of 2019 and connected cases, which had directed the disposal of appeals and granted a stay on recovery during the pendency of appeals. The revenue's counsel 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 assessed tax should be kept in abeyance pending the disposal of the petitioner's 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 on recovery proceedings pending the appeal. The petitioner argued that the present case had substantially similar facts and should be treated accordingly. Revenue's Contentions: The learned Standing Counsel for the respondents admitted that the facts of the case were substantially the same as those considered by the Division Bench in W.A. No. 1536 of 2019 and agreed that the said judgment could be followed.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Heard together (2 matters)
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 WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 7TH PHALGUNA, 1941 WP(C).No.5524 OF 2020(M) PETITIONER/S: THE CHADAYAMANGALAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.1868, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, CHADAYAMANGALAM P. O., KOLLAM DISTRICT - 691 534. BY ADVS. SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR SRI.ARJUN RAGHAVAN RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1 AND TPS, OFFICE OF THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KARBALA JUNCTION, KOLLAM,PIN - 691 001. 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 003. BY SC CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.5524 OF 2020 2 JUDGMENT Dated this the 26th day of February 2020 Heard Sri. T.R.Harikumar, 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)/ 2nd respondent to 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 WP(C).No.5524 OF 2020 3 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 uu 27.02.2020
WP(C).No.5524 OF 2020 4
Appendix — schedule of exhibits
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Kalra Traders vs. Union Of INDIAUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Ms Isoft vs. The Commissioner State TaxUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Sita Enterprises vs. Office Of The CommissionerUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Capri Global Capital LTD Through Represented By Its Law Officer Mr. Varun Kaljoria vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh Through Principal SecretaryMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Sri Tatiparthy Venkata Swamy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 25 Oct 2026
