THE THALAVOOR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/4518/2020HC KeralaKLHC01012412202018 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 a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. This decision is to be taken in accordance with the law, after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Crucially, the Court ordered that the disposal should not insist on the payment of 20% of the tax demanded, referencing a circular from 2017. Furthermore, recovery proceedings pursuant to the assessment order are to be kept in abeyance until a decision is taken on the appeal. The principle established is that appellate authorities should expedite the disposal of appeals, and recovery can be stayed pending such disposal, potentially without strict adherence to pre-deposit requirements if a circular permits.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, The Thalavoor Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., 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) are not specified 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. Assessee's contention: The assessee seeks a direction from the High Court to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to decide the appeal filed against the assessment order. The assessee relies on a circular of 2017, implying it may pertain to the conditions for appeal disposal or stay of recovery. Revenue's contention: The judgment records that the learned counsel for both sides were heard, but the specific contentions of the revenue are not detailed. However, the court's direction to dispose of the appeal without insisting on 20% of the tax demanded suggests the revenue might have been seeking such a pre-deposit.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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.4518 OF 2020(L) PETITIONER/S: THE THALAVOOR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO.646, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,THALAVOOR P O, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN-691332. BY ADVS. SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR SRI.ARJUN RAGHAVAN RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD - 4, OFFICE OF THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLLAM RANGE, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KARBALA JUNCTION, KOLLAM-PIN-691001. 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-PIN- 695003. OTHER PRESENT: 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.4518 OF 2020(L) 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. AMIT RAWAL shg JUDGE

WP(C).No.4518 OF 2020(L) 3

Appendix — schedule of exhibits

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2017-2018 DATED 27.11.2019. EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SECTION 156 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT DATED 27.11.2019. EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE ONLINE APPEAL DATED 21.12.2019 ALONG WITH GROUNDS OF APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT, AGAINST EXT P1 ASSESSMENT ORDER. EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN EXT-P3 APPEAL DATED 24.01.2020. EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 19.07.2019 IN WA NO. 1639/2019 EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 25.11.2019 IN WP(C) NO.31787 OF 2019.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →