THE AGRICULTURAL IMPROVEMENT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,

WP(C)/5326/2020HC KeralaKLHC01014281202025 February 2020Author: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI3 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 appeal 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 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 W.A. No. 1536 of 2019. 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 Court did not decide the merits of the appeal itself, but rather directed its expeditious disposal and granted interim relief regarding recovery.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, The Pallassana Agricultural Improvement Co-operative Society 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 for a stay of 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 the pendency of appeals. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 5, Palakkad, and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Thrissur, were the respondents. The assessment years are not specified in the 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? (Question of law) The petitioner contended that the Division Bench in W.A. No. 1536 of 2019 had directed the disposal of appeals and granted a stay of recovery proceedings during the pendency of the appeal. The petitioner argued that this precedent should be followed in its case. The revenue, through its learned Standing Counsel, admitted that the facts of the present case were substantially the same and similar to those noted by the Division Bench in W.A. No. 1536 of 2019 and therefore, the earlier judgment could be followed.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Heard together (2 matters)

WP(C).No.5326 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.5326 OF 2020(M) PETITIONER: THE PALLASSANA AGRICULTURAL IMPROVEMENT CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., PALLASSANA P.O., CHITTUR, PALAKKAD - 678 505, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT, MAHESH P.V., AGED 43,S/O.SIVASANKARAN. BY ADVS. SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON SMT.MEERA V.MENON RESPONDENTS: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 5, AYAKAR BHAVAN, PALAKKAD - 678 014. 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), SAKTHAN NAGAR, THRISSUR - 680 021. OTHER PRESENT: SC SRI JOSE JOSEPH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT Dated this the 25th day of February 2020

Heard Sri. Harisankar V.Menon, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Jose Joseph, 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 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 css/

Appendix — schedule of exhibits

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2017-18. EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT 2017-18. EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →