THE KULAPPULLY SERVICE CO OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO. 458901, vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/5601/2020HC KeralaKLHC01014952202026 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) to consider and dispose of the statutory appeals filed by the petitioner at the earliest. The Court also directed that recovery proceedings and the collection of tax assessed should be kept in abeyance pending the disposal of these appeals. This decision was made taking note of the Full Bench decision reported in The Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd, v. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Calicut [2019 (2) KHC 287] and the admitted similarity of facts with the judgment in W.A. No.1536 of 2019. The Court did not decide on the merits of the underlying tax dispute, but rather on the procedural aspects of appeal disposal and recovery.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, The Kulappully Service Co Operative Bank Ltd., filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The petitioner sought directions for the disposal of their statutory appeals pending before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The petitioner relied on a previous judgment dated 01.07.2019 in W.A No.1536 of 2019 and connected cases, which directed the disposal of appeals and granted a stay of recovery proceedings during the pendency of the appeals. The Standing Counsel for the respondents admitted that the facts of the present case were substantially similar to those in the cited writ appeal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) should be directed to dispose of the statutory appeals filed by the petitioner at the earliest? (Question of procedure) 2. Whether recovery proceedings and collection of tax assessed should be kept in abeyance pending the disposal of the statutory appeals? (Question of procedure) Assessee's Contention: The petitioner relied on the judgment in W.A No.1536 of 2019 and connected cases, which directed disposal of appeals and granted a stay of recovery proceedings. The petitioner argued that similar directions should be issued in their case due to the similarity of facts. Revenue's Contention: The Standing Counsel for the respondents admitted that the facts of the case were substantially the same as those in the previously decided writ appeal, implying agreement with the petitioner's reliance on that precedent.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Heard together (2 matters)

WP(C).No.5601 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 WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 7TH PHALGUNA, 1941 WP(C).No.5601 OF 2020(A) PETITIONER/S: THE KULAPPULLY SERVICE CO OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO. 458901, KULAPPULLY , SHORANUR, PALAKKAD-679 122, KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, SHRI V.K.MENON. BY ADVS. SRI.T.M.SREEDHARAN (SR.) SMT.NISHA JOHN SRI.V.P.NARAYANAN SMT.DIVYA RAVINDRAN RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, PALAKKAD-678 014. 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, SAKTHAN THAMPURAN NAGAR, THRISSUR-680 001. OTHER PRESENT: SC JOSE JOSEPH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

-2- J U D G M E N T Dated this the 26th day of February 2020 Heard Advocate V.P. Narayanan for petitioner and Advocate Jose Joseph, 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.

-3- Hence, the writ petition is disposed of directing the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/ 2nd respondent to consider and dispose of the statutory appeals 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 [2019 (2) KHC 287] and to keep in abeyance recovery proceedings and collection of tax assessed, pending disposal of such appeals. S.V.BHATTI JUDGE jjj -4-

Appendix — schedule of exhibits

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 17.12.2019 FOR AY-2017-18 ALONG WITH DEMAND NOTICE AND COMPUTATION STATEMENT PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 12.1.2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR AY-2017-18 EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 18.2.2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER FOR AY-2017-18 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION U/S 220(6) OF THE ACT DATED 18.2.2020 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →