NARUVAMOODU SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.160, vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/30409/2019HC KeralaKLHC01079183201912 November 2019Author: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala, while not deciding the merits of the disallowance of deduction under Section 80P, directed the 3rd respondent (ITAT) to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's appeal (Ext.P4) within six months from the date of receiving a copy of the judgment. Recovery steps for the amounts confirmed against the petitioner by the rectified order (Ext.P3) are to be kept in abeyance until the ITAT passes its order and communicates it to the petitioner. The Court noted that it has granted similar stays in other matters pending appeal. No specific finding was made on the disallowance of deduction under Section 80P, as the appeal is yet to be decided by the ITAT.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Naruvamoodu Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., has filed a writ petition challenging a rectified order under the Income Tax Act. The petitioner has preferred an appeal and a stay petition before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Cochin Bench, which is the 3rd respondent. The core issue in dispute pertains to the disallowance of deduction under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act. The petitioner seeks a stay on recovery proceedings pending the disposal of their appeal by the ITAT.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the disallowance of deduction under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act is legally sustainable? The petitioner contends that the disallowance of deduction under Section 80P is the subject matter of their appeal before the ITAT. The revenue's contentions are not recorded in the judgment. The petitioner has filed an appeal (Ext.P4) and a stay petition (Ext.P5) before the ITAT against the rectified order (Ext.P3). The writ petition is filed seeking a direction for the expeditious disposal of the appeal and a stay on recovery proceedings.

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 12TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 / 21ST KARTHIKA, 1941 WP(C).No.30409 OF 2019(A) PETITIONER: NARUVAMOODU SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.160, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, NARUVAMOODU P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN- 695020. BY ADVS. SRI.ARJUN RAGHAVAN SRI.ADITHYA RAJEEV RESPONDENTS: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2), OFFICE OF THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KAWDIAR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN- 695003. 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN- 695003. 3 THE REGISTRAR, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, COCHIN BENCH, KENDRIYA BHAVAN, BLOCK NO.C1 AND C2, 1ST FLOOR, KAKKANAD, COCHIN- 682030. OTHER PRESENT: SC CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.11.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.30409 OF 2019(A) 2

J U D G M E N T Against Ext.P3 rectified order under the Income Tax Act, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P4 appeal and Ext.P5 stay petition before the 3rd respondent. It is stated that the issue involved pertains to the dis-allowance of deduction under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act.

2.

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Standing counsel for the respondents.

3.

Taking note of the fact that this Court has, in similar matters, granted a stay against recovery of amounts pending consideration of the appeal by the Appellate Authority, I dispose the writ petition with a direction to the 3rd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P4 appeal, 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 for recovery of amounts confirmed against the petitioner by Ext.P3 rectified order shall be kept in abeyance till such time as orders are passed by the 3rd respondent, as directed and the order communicated to the petitioner. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE Ska

WP(C).No.30409 OF 2019(A) 3

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2012-2013 DATED 14.12.2017. EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 17.12.2018 IN ITA NO.184/EF/TVM/CIT(A)/TVM/2017-18 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 03.09.2019 IN ITA NO.184/EF/TVM/CIT(A)/TVM/2017-18, ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 154 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM DATED 16.10.2019 ALONG WITH AFFIDAVIT AND CHELAN. EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED ALONG WITH EXT.P4 APPEAL DATED 16.10.2019.

More judgments on Section 80P

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →