VILAPPIL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/29646/2017HC KeralaKLHC01077591201714 September 20174 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the appellate authority (the 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 be stayed until such orders are passed by the appellate authority. The judgment explicitly states that it is disposed of without any observation on the merits of the case. The recovery proceedings are kept in abeyance until the appellate authority's directions are complied with, and the appellate authority's order will determine further steps. No issue was expressly left undecided, as the court's direction was procedural.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Vilappil Service Co-operative Bank Limited, is challenging an assessment order for the assessment year 2014-15, issued by the Income Tax Officer (Ward 2(4)). The petitioner filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and a stay petition. While these were pending, coercive proceedings were initiated. The petitioner filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala seeking a direction for the disposal of the stay petition and a stay on coercive recovery actions. The assessment order and demand notice are dated December 28, 2016. The appeal was filed on January 27, 2017, and the stay petition on May 2, 2017.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should direct the appellate authority to dispose of the pending stay petition expeditiously, and in the interim, stay coercive recovery proceedings. The assessee argued that coercive proceedings have been initiated while their appeal and stay petition are pending before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). They seek a direction for the timely disposal of the stay petition and a stay on recovery until such disposal. The revenue did not record any specific arguments in the judgment. However, the context implies that the revenue would be entitled to pursue recovery unless a stay is granted by the appellate authority.

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. 29646 of 2017 (E) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------- VILAPPIL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED, 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, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 003. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 003. BY SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, 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: rvs. WP(C).No. 29646 of 2017 (E) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS: ----------------------- EXHIBIT P1. TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE JOINT REGISTRAR (GENERAL), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED, 01.11.2016. 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 2014-15 DATED 28.12.2016. EXHIBIT P4. TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE OF DEMAND ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER UNDER SECTION 156 OF THE 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, 27.01.2017. EXHIBIT P6. TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN EXHIBIT P5 APPEAL DATED, 02.05.2017. EXHIBIT P7. TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO.24/2017 DATED, 04.04.2017. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : ----------------------- NIL. /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE rvs. K.VINOD CHANDRAN, J - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P(C) No.29646 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 2014-15. 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).29646/2017 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 →