VAKATHANAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/32674/2019HC KeralaKLHC01085352201903 December 2019Author: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (3rd respondent) to consider and pass orders on the appeals (Exts.P4 and P4(a)) within an outer time limit of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. The Court also directed that recovery steps pursuant to the demand notice (Ext.P6) for the amounts confirmed against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance until such time as the Tribunal passes orders on the appeals and communicates them to the petitioner. The petitioner is required to produce a copy of the judgment and the writ petition before the Tribunal for further action. The specific finding on the disallowance of deduction under Section 80P was not decided by the High Court, as the matter was disposed of procedurally.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Vakathanom Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., is challenging assessment orders (Exts.P1 and P1(a)) passed by the Income Tax Officer. The petitioner has filed appeals (Exts.P4 and P4(a)) along with stay petitions (Exts.P5 and P5(a)) before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (3rd respondent). The petitioner contends that recovery steps are being taken despite the pendency of stay petitions. The core issue in the appeals relates to the disallowance of deductions claimed under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act. The assessment orders confirmed certain amounts, leading to a demand notice (Ext.P6).

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal should be directed to consider and pass orders on the appeals filed by the petitioner, concerning disallowance of deduction under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, within a specified timeframe? 2. Whether recovery steps for the amounts confirmed by the assessment orders should be stayed pending the disposal of the appeals by the Tribunal? Assessee's Contentions: The petitioner argues that recovery steps are being initiated prematurely, even before the stay petitions are considered by the Tribunal. They rely on the fact that the appeals pertain to the disallowance of deductions under Section 80P, which is a significant issue. Revenue's Contentions: The judgment does not record specific contentions from the revenue. However, the revenue is represented by the Income Tax Officer and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80P

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 A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 03RD DAY OF DECEMBER 2019 / 12TH AGRAHAYANA, 1941 WP(C).No.32674 OF 2019(H) PETITIONER/S: VAKATHANAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NJALIANKUZHI, VAKATHANAM, KERALA - 686 011, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, MERCYAMMA JOSEPH. BY ADVS. SRI.ANIL D. NAIR SRI.SREEJITH R.NAIR SMT. ARYA ANIL SHRI.GOKULRAJ L. SMT.SRI HARINI S.P. RESPONDENT/S: 1 INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -3, THIRUVALLA - 689 101. 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) KOTTAYAM - 686 001. 3 INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOCHI- 682 037, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.12.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.32674 OF 2019(H) 2

JUDGMENT Against Exts.P1 and P1(a) assessment orders under the Income Tax Act, the petitioner has preferred Exts.P4 and P4(a) appeals, together with Exts.P5 and P5(a) stay petitions before the 3rd respondent. It is the case of the petitioner that even prior to considering the stay petition, recovery steps are taken by the respondents against the petitioner for recovery of the amounts confirmed by Exts.P1 and P1(a) assessment orders. It is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the issue involved in the appeal pertains to dis-allowance of deduction claimed under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act.

2.

I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and also the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made across the Bar and taking note of the fact that in similar matters, this Court has directed the Appellate Authority to consider and pass orders in the appeal and stayed the recovery of disputed amounts pending disposal of the appeal, this Writ petition is disposed directing the 3rd respondent to consider and pass orders on Exts.P4 and P4(a) appeals within an outer time limit of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment after hearing the petitioner. Recovery steps pursuant to Ext.P6 demand notice for recovery of amounts confirmed against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance till such time as orders are passed by the 3rd respondent as directed above and communicated to the petitioner. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment together with a copy of the writ petition before the 3rd respondent for further action. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE

WP(C).No.32674 OF 2019(H) 3

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE A.Y.2010-11 DATED 22.03.2013. EXHIBIT P1(a) TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE A.Y.2012-13 DATED 27.10.2014. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 28.02.2018 FOR THE A.Y. 2010-11 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2(a) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 28.02.2018 FOR THE A.Y. 2012-13 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER U/S 154r.w.s 250 OF THE ACT FOR THE A.Y. 2010-11 DATED 30.10.2019. EXHIBIT P3(a) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER U/S 154r.w.s 250 OF THE ACT FOR THE A.Y. 2012-13 DATED 30.10.2019. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE STATUTORY APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE A.Y.2010- 11. EXHIBIT P4(a) TRUE COPY OF THE STATUTORY APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE A.Y.2012- 13 EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FOR THE YEAR 2010-11 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT . EXHIBIT P5(a) TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FOR THE YEAR 2012-13 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT . EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED FOR A.Y.2010-11 AND A.Y 2012-13 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. sd

More judgments on Section 80P

All 5,069 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80P →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →