MADHAVA VILASOM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.1347 vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/5259/2020HC KeralaKLHC01014176202025 February 2020Author: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI3 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) (the second respondent) to consider and dispose of the statutory appeal filed by the petitioner at the earliest. The Court specifically directed that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) should take 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]. Furthermore, the Court ordered that recovery proceedings and the collection of tax assessed should be kept in abeyance pending the disposal of the statutory appeal. The Court found that the facts were substantially similar to those in a previous Division Bench judgment, which justified following that precedent.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Madhava Vilasom 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 appeal pending before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the second respondent. The petitioner relied on a previous judgment of the Division Bench in W.A. No. 1536 of 2019 and connected cases, which directed the disposal of appeals and granted a stay on recovery proceedings during the pendency of the appeal. The Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department 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? (Question of procedure) 2. Whether recovery proceedings and collection of tax assessed should be kept in abeyance pending the disposal of the statutory appeal? (Question of procedure) Assessee's Contention: The petitioner relies on the judgment in W.A. No. 1536 of 2019 and connected cases, wherein the Division Bench directed the disposal of appeals and granted a stay of recovery proceedings during the pendency of the appeal. The petitioner argues that this precedent should be followed. Revenue's Contention: The learned Standing Counsel for the respondents admits that the facts of the present case are substantially the same and similar to the facts noted by the Division Bench in W.A. No. 1536 of 2019, implying agreement with the petitioner's request to follow the precedent.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
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.5259 OF 2020(F) PETITIONER: MADHAVA VILASOM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.1347, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, ARASUMOODU, KULATHOOR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT BY ADVS. SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR SRI.ARJUN RAGHAVAN SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT RESPONDENTS: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), OFFICE OF THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR P.O. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 003. 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 003. OTHER PRESENT: JOS WINSON FOR CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC No.5259 of 2020 2

JUDGMENT Heard Sri. T.R.Harikumar, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Jose Winson for Christopher Abraham, the learned Standing Counsel for respondents.

2.

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.

3.

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/

WPC No.5259 of 2020

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2017-18 DATED 20.12.2019 EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SECTION 156 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT DATED 20.12.2019 EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE ONLICE APPEAL DATED 13.1.2020 ALONG WITH GROUND OF APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT, AGAINST EXT P-1 ASSESSMENT ORDER EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN EXT-P3 APPEAL DATED 13.1.2020 EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO ITBA/COM/F/17/2019-20/1024498931(1) DATED 31.1.2020., ISSUED BY TH 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 19.7.2019 IN WA NO 1639 OF 2019 EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 25.11.2019 IN WPC NO 31787 OF 2019 EXHIBIT P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 17.2.2020 IN WPC NO 4310 OF 2020

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →