THE KADINAMKULAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.NO.T 254 vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,

WP(C)/4496/2020HC KeralaKLHC01012352202018 February 2020Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL3 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the second respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), to decide the appeal (Ext.P3) in accordance with the law. This decision is to be made after providing the petitioner an opportunity of hearing. The Court specified that the disposal should occur within three months from the date of receiving a copy of the judgment. Crucially, the Court directed that the appeal should be decided without insisting on the payment of 20% of the tax demanded, referencing a circular from 2017. Furthermore, recovery proceedings initiated pursuant to the assessment order (Ext.P1) are to be kept in abeyance until a decision is taken on the appeal. No specific finding was made on the merits of the assessment or the appeal itself.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, The Kadinamkulam Service Co-operative Society Ltd. No. T 254, represented by its Secretary, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The petition sought a direction for the disposal of an appeal (Ext.P3) filed before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (the second respondent). This appeal was against an assessment order (Ext.P1) passed by the Income Tax Officer (the first respondent). The assessment year(s) and the specific amount in dispute are not recorded in the judgment. The procedural history involves the filing of the appeal before the CIT(A) and the subsequent writ petition seeking its expeditious disposal.

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 assessee? (Question of procedure/administration) The assessee contended that their appeal before the second respondent (CIT(A)) needed to be disposed of. The revenue did not record any specific arguments in the judgment. The judgment does not explicitly state the arguments made by either party concerning the merits of the appeal, but rather focuses on the procedural aspect of its disposal. The core issue revolves around the delay in the appellate process and the petitioner's prayer for a time-bound resolution.

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 TUESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 29TH MAGHA, 1941 WP(C).No.4496 OF 2020(J) PETITIONER/S: THE KADINAMKULAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.NO.T 254 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,CHITTATTUMUKKU.P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT,PIN-695301. BY ADVS. SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR SRI.ARJUN RAGHAVAN RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1),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. OTHER PRESENT: SRI CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.4496 OF 2020(J) 2 JUDGMENT Dated this the 18th day of February 2020 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. SD/- AMIT RAWAL shg JUDGE WP(C).No.4496 OF 2020(J) 3 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2017-2018 DATED 22.12.2019 EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SECTION 156 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT DATED 22.12.2019. EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE ONLINE APPEAL DATED 07.01.2020 ALONG WITH GROUNDS OF APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT,AGAINST

EXT-P1 ASSESSMENT ORDER. EXHIBIT P4 AOF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN EXT-P3 APPEAL DATED 13.01.2020. EXHIBIT P5 AOF THE NOTICE NO.ITBA/COM/F/17/2019-20/1024497152(1)DATED 31.01.2020,ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P6 AOF THE JUDGMENT DATED 19.07.2019 IN W.A.NO.1639 OF 2019. EXHIBIT P7 AOF THE JUDGMENT DATED 25.11.2019 IN WP(C)NO.31787 OF 2019.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →