KANGAZHA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO.1145, vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,

WP(C)/4957/2020HC KeralaKLHC01013540202020 February 2020Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL3 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to decide the appeal (Ext.P3) in accordance with the law. The appellate authority was instructed to provide an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. This decision was to be made within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Crucially, the court directed that the appellate authority should not insist on the payment of 20% of the tax demanded, as per a circular from 2017. Furthermore, recovery proceedings pursuant to the assessment order were to be kept in abeyance until a decision was taken on the appeal. The court did not leave any issue undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Kangazha Service Co-operative Bank Ltd, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala seeking a direction to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to dispose of their appeal. The appeal was filed against an assessment order passed by the Income Tax Officer. The petitioner sought a directive for the appellate authority to decide the appeal within a specified period and without insisting on the payment of 20% of the tax demanded, referencing a circular from 2017. The court heard both the petitioner and the respondent.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should direct the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to dispose of the pending appeal filed by the petitioner against the assessment order. Assessee's contention: The petitioner sought a direction for the expeditious disposal of their appeal (Ext.P3) before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) against the assessment order (Ext.P1). They also sought that the appellate authority should not insist on the payment of 20% of the tax demanded, relying on a circular from 2017. Revenue's contention: The judgment records that the learned counsel for both sides were heard, but does not explicitly detail the revenue's specific arguments against the directions sought by the petitioner.

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 AMIT RAWAL THURSDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 1ST PHALGUNA, 1941 WP(C).No.4957 OF 2020(T) PETITIONER/S: KANGAZHA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO.1145, KANGAZHA P.O., KOTTAYAM-686541, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. BY ADVS. SRI.C.A.JOJO SRI.MATHEWS JOSEPH SMT.SWATHY S. RESPONDENT/S: 1 INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4, INCOME TAX OFFICE, T.K. ROAD, THIRUVALLA- 689101, PATHANAMTHITTA. 2 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOTTAYAM-686002. OTHER PRESENT: SRI JOSE JOSEPH SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.4957 OF 2020(T) 2

JUDGMENT Petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to dispose of Ext.P3 appeal preferred before the second respondent/Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) against the assessment order Ext.P1. 2. Having heard the learned counsel on both sides, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the second respondent to take a decision on Ext.P3 appeal in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment without insisting on payment of 20% of the tax demanded, as per circular of 2017. Till such time a decision is taken on the appeal, recovery proceedings pursuant to the assessment order shall be kept in abeyance. AMIT RAWAL sab JUDGE

WP(C).No.4957 OF 2020(T) 3 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 AOF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR AY 2017-18 DATED 23/12/2019 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2 AOF THE DEMAND NOTICE U/S. 156 DATED 23/12/2019 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3 AOF THE APPEAL FOR AY 2017-18 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 23/01/2020. EXHIBIT P4 AOF LETTER DEMAND DATED 24/01/2020 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →