VILAPPIL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.2522 vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/29643/2017HC KeralaKLHC01077588201714 September 20174 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the appellate authority (2nd respondent) to consider and dispose of the stay application (Ext.P6) within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the judgment. The Court further ordered that coercive proceedings against the petitioner be stayed until such orders are passed by the appellate authority. The appellate authority's order would then determine the further course of action. The writ petition was disposed of without any observation on the merits of the case, and the recovery was kept in abeyance until the appellate authority complied with the directions.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Vilappil Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., is challenging an assessment order (Ext.P3) for the assessment year 2011-12, passed by the Income Tax Officer (1st respondent). The petitioner filed an appeal (Ext.P5) along with a stay petition (Ext.P6) before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (2nd respondent). While the appeal and stay petition were pending, coercive recovery proceedings were initiated against the petitioner. Consequently, the petitioner filed this writ petition before the High Court of Kerala seeking a direction for the disposal of their stay application.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should direct the appellate authority to dispose of the stay petition expeditiously, given the pendency of coercive recovery proceedings? Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that coercive proceedings have been initiated while their appeal and stay petition are pending before the appellate authority, necessitating intervention by the High Court. The assessee relied on the fact that their appeal and stay petition were filed before the 2nd respondent. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the revenue. However, the context implies the revenue was pursuing recovery actions.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 156

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 K.VINOD CHANDRAN THURSDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2017/23RD BHADRA, 1939 WP(C).No. 29643 of 2017 (E) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------- VILAPPIL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., NO.2522, HEAD OFFICE, PEYYAD THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, ANIL KUMAR M., S/O.MADHANAPPAN NAIR BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR RESPONDENT(S): -------------- 1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(4), OFFICE OF THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX RANGE 2, AYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 003 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-95 003 BY SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM,SC,INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14-09-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: nkr WP(C).No. 29643 of 2017 (E) ---------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)'EXHIBITS: ---------------------- EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE JOINT REGISTRAR (GENERAL), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED, 1-11-2016 EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE BYE-LAWS OF THE SOCIETY, STATING ITS OBJECTIVES EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2011-12 DT, 28-12-2016 EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE OF DEMAND ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER UNDER SECTION 156 OF INCOME TAX ACT DATED, 28-12-2016 EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) DATED, 27-1-2017 EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN EXHIBIT P5 APPEAL DATED, 2-5-2017 EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO.24/2017 DATED, 4-4-2017 RESPONDENT(S)'EXHIBITS:NIL ---------------------- //TRUE COPY// P.A.TO JUDGE nkr K.VINOD CHANDRAN, J - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P(C) No.29643 of 2017 E - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 14th day of September, 2017

J U D G M E N T

Ext.P3 is the order passed against the petitioner for the assessment year 2011-12. Against this order, petitioner filed Ext.P5 appeal, which is accompanied by Exts.P6 stay petition before the 2nd respondent. Appeal and stay petition are pending before the 2nd respondent. In the meanwhile, coercive proceedings have been initiated. It is in this context, the writ petition has been filed.

2.

In the above circumstances, it is directed that the appellate authority, the 2nd respondent herein, consider and dispose of Ext.P6 stay application within a period of two

WP(C).29643/2017 2 months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment and the coercive proceedings be stayed until such orders are passed, which order shall determine the matter thereafter.

The writ petition is disposed of without any observation on merits and keeping in abeyance the recovery till such time as the directions herein are complied with by the appellate authority, whose orders shall determine the further steps thereafter. K.VINOD CHANDRAN,

Judge jma //// P.A to Judge

More judgments on Section 156

All 694 judgments and leading authorities on Section 156 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →