KULASEKHARAMANGALAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.3850, vs. THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES,

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/4742/2020HC KeralaKLHC01013046202019 February 2020Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to decide the appeal (Ext.P3) within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. This decision is to be made in accordance with the law, after providing the petitioner an opportunity of hearing. Crucially, the court specified that the disposal should not insist on the payment of 20% of the tax demanded, referencing a circular of 2017. Furthermore, recovery proceedings pursuant to the assessment order are to be kept in abeyance until a decision is taken on the appeal. The ratio decidendi is that appellate authorities should dispose of pending appeals expeditiously and that recovery proceedings can be stayed pending such disposal, especially when a relevant circular permits waiver of pre-deposit conditions.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Kulasekharamangalam Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., filed an appeal (Ext.P3) before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) against an assessment order (Ext.P2). The petitioner approached the High Court of Kerala seeking a direction for the disposal of this pending appeal. The assessment order was passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward 2. The respondents are the Central Board of Direct Taxes, the Income Tax Officer, and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The procedural history involves the filing of the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) and the subsequent writ petition seeking its expeditious disposal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) should be directed to dispose of the pending appeal filed by the petitioner? (Question of procedure/direction). Assessee's contention: The petitioner sought a direction for the disposal of their appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). They relied on a circular of 2017 which, as interpreted by the court, allowed for disposal without insisting on 20% of the tax demanded. Revenue's contention: The judgment does not record any specific contention from the revenue's side regarding the direction for disposal of the appeal. However, the court's direction implicitly addresses the revenue's potential interest in recovery proceedings.

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 WEDNESDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 30TH MAGHA, 1941 WP(C).No.4742 OF 2020(P) PETITIONER/S: KULASEKHARAMANGALAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.3850, KULASEKHARMANGALAM POT, VAIKOM, KOTTAYAM 686 608, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY RESMI A.K., BY ADVS. DR.K.P.PRADEEP SRI.T.T.BIJU SMT.T.THASMI RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NORTH BLOCK NEW DELHI 110 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN. 2 INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2, INCOME TAX OFFICER, PUBLIC LIBRARY BUILDING, SASTRI ROAD, KOTTAYAM 686 608. 3 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), INCOME TAX OFFICER, SASTRI ROAD, KOTTAYAM 686 608. OTHER PRESENT: SRI JOSE JOSEPH SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.4742 OF 2020(P) 2

JUDGMENT Petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to dispose of Ext.P3 appeal preferred before the third respondent/Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) against the assessment order Ext.P2. 2. Having heard the learned counsel on both sides, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the third 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.4742 OF 2020(P) 3 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1OF THE RETURN OF INCOME DATED 01.03.2018 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2017-18 IN PAN AAAJKO390B WITH ACKNOWLEDGEMENT NO. 4191442610101318. EXHIBIT P2OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO. ITBA/AST/S/143(3)/2019-20/1022801908(1) DATED 21.12.2019 ISSUED FOR THE YEAR 2017- 18 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3OF THE APPEAL DATED 20.01.2020 FIELD BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2017-18. EXHIBIT P4OF THE DEMAND NOTICE NO. ITBA/AST/S/156/2019 -20/1022801921 (1) IN PAN AAAJK0390B DATED 21.12.2019 FOR THE YEAR 2017-18 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P5OF THE STAY APPLICATION FIELD ON 13.02.2020 BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT IN EXT. P3 APPEAL.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →