PALLIPPURAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/4505/2020HC KeralaKLHC01012357202017 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 appeals (Exts. P3 and P3(a)) in accordance with the law. This decision was to be made after providing the petitioner an opportunity of hearing. The court specified a timeline of three months from the date of receiving a copy of the judgment for the disposal. Crucially, the court directed that the Commissioner should not insist on the payment of 20% of the tax demanded, referencing a circular from 2017. Until a decision is reached on the appeals, recovery proceedings initiated pursuant to the assessment orders are to be kept in abeyance. The court did not explicitly leave any issue undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Pallipuram Service Co-operative Bank, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala seeking a direction for the disposal of its appeals and interim applications pending before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-II, Kochi. These appeals were filed against assessment orders passed by the Income Tax Officer, Non-Corp Ward 2(5). The petitioner sought a directive for the Commissioner to decide these appeals and interim applications, which had been pending for an unspecified period. The assessment orders were marked as Exts. P1 and P2, and the appeals and interim applications were marked as Exts. P3, P3(a), P4, and P4(a).

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) should be directed to dispose of the pending appeals and interim applications filed by the petitioner against the assessment orders. The petitioner argued that its appeals and interim applications were pending before the second respondent and sought a direction for their disposal. The revenue, represented by the Income Tax Officer and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), did not record any specific arguments in the judgment. However, the court's direction implies that the revenue's position would be considered during the disposal of the appeals. The court also considered a circular of 2017 in its decision.

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 MONDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 28TH MAGHA, 1941 WP(C).No.4505 OF 2020(K) PETITIONER/S: PALLIPPURAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK NO.760, PALLIPURAM, CHERAI, ERNAKULAM-683514 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY SMT.ASADEVI MA BY ADVS. SRI.AJI V.DEV SMT.O.A.NURIYA SRI.ALAN PRIYADARSHI DEV RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER NON CORP WARD 2(5), INCOME TAX OFFICE, L.G. TOWERS, THOPPUMPADY, ERNAKULAM-682005 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)-2 KOCHI-682036 3 THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110001 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN OTHER PRESENT: SRI JOSE JOSEPH SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.4505 OF 2020(K) 2

JUDGMENT Petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to dispose of Exts.P3 and P3(a) appeals and Exts.P4 and P4(a) interim applications preferred before the second respondent/Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) against the assessment orders Exts.P1 and P2. 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 Exts.P3 and P3(a) appeals 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 orders shall be kept in abeyance. AMIT RAWAL sab JUDGE

WP(C).No.4505 OF 2020(K) 3 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2012- 13 DATED 12.03.2015 EXHIBIT P2OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2017- 18 DATED 30.12.2019 EXHIBIT P3OF THE STATUTORY APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER AGAINST EXT.P1 ORDER DATED 09.04.2015 EXHIBIT P3(A)OF THE STATUTORY APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER AGAINST EXT.P2 ORDER DATED 15.01.2020 EXHIBIT P4OF THE STAY PETITION FILED ALONG WITH THE EXT.03 APPEAL DATED 13.04.2015 EXHIBIT P4(A)OF THE STAY PETITION FILED ALONG WITH THE EXT.03(A) APPEAL DATED 12.02.2020 EXHIBIT P5 AOF THE INTIMATION FROM THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 11.02.2020 DIRECTING THE PETITIONER TO REMIT 20% OF THE AMOUNT DEMANDED FOR CONSIDERATION OF EXT.P4 AND P4(A) STAY PETITIONS IN THIS INSTANT CASE EXHIBIT P6 AOF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT DATED 01.07.2019 IN W.A NO.1536/2019

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →