MARANCHERY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)

WP(C)/5419/2020HC KeralaKLHC01014177202025 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 ordered that recovery proceedings and the collection of tax assessed should be kept in abeyance pending the disposal of the appeal. This decision was based on the petitioner's reliance on a previous Division Bench judgment in W.A. No. 1536 of 2019 and connected cases, which the Revenue's counsel admitted was factually 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 [2019 (2) KHC 287] as a guiding precedent for the disposal of the appeal.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Maranchery Service Co-operative Bank Limited, 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 for a stay on recovery proceedings. The petitioner relied on a previous Division Bench judgment in W.A. No. 1536 of 2019 and connected cases, which directed the disposal of appeals and granted a stay of recovery during their pendency. The Revenue's counsel admitted that the facts of the present case were substantially similar to those in the cited 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 and the relevant precedents. 2. Whether recovery proceedings and collection of tax assessed should be kept in abeyance pending the disposal of the petitioner's statutory appeal. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner contended that a Division Bench judgment in W.A. No. 1536 of 2019 and connected cases directed the disposal of appeals and granted a stay of recovery proceedings during the pendency of the appeal, and this precedent should be followed. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue's counsel admitted that the facts of the case were substantially the same as those in the Division Bench judgment relied upon by the petitioner, implying agreement with the petitioner's plea for following the precedent.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Heard together (2 matters)

WP(C).No.5419 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 TUESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 6TH PHALGUNA, 1941 WP(C).No.5419 OF 2020(B) PETITIONER: MARANCHERY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED NO. 28, PO MARANCHERY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY BY ADV. SRI.O.D.SIVADAS RESPONDENTS: 1 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AYAKAR BHAVAN, KOZHIKODE - 673 001 2 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD (4), TIRUR 676 001 BY SRI. JOS WINSON FOR SRI. CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No.5419 OF 2020(B) 2 JUDGMENT Dated this the 25th day of February 2020 Heard Sri. O.D. Sivadas, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Jos Winson holding for 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.5419 OF 2020(B) 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.5419 OF 2020(B) 4

Appendix — schedule of exhibits

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 27.12.2019 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE PERIOD 2017-18 EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 25.01.2020 FILED BY THE BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE PERIOD 2017-18

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →