MARANCHERY RURAL CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.NO.M 800, vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)

WP(C)/3698/2020HC KeralaKLHC01010422202011 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.P4) in accordance with the law. This decision is to be made after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The disposal is to be completed within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Crucially, the Court specified that the Commissioner 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 specific findings on the merits of the appeal or the assessment order were not addressed, as the writ petition was for a direction to dispose of the appeal.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Maranchery Rural Co-operative Society Ltd., filed an appeal (Ext.P4) before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) against an assessment order (Ext.P2) passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward 4, Tirur. The petitioner approached the High Court of Kerala seeking a direction for the disposal of this pending appeal. The assessment year(s) and the amount in dispute are not specified in the judgment. The procedural history involves the filing of the appeal before the first respondent 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? 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, implying a procedural aspect related to the appeal process. Revenue's Contention: The judgment records that the learned counsel for both sides were heard. No specific contentions for the revenue are recorded in the judgment, beyond their participation in the hearing.

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 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 22ND MAGHA, 1941 WP(C).No.3698 OF 2020(J) PETITIONER/S: MARANCHERY RURAL CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.NO.M 800, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MARANCHERY, MARANCHERY POST, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-679 581. BY ADVS. SRI.S.K.PREMJITH MENON SHRI.MANEKSHA D. SRI.BINU V V VEETTIL VALAPPIL RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MANANCHIRA, KOZHIKODE-673 001. 2 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4, TIRUR-676 001. OTHER PRESENT: SC CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.3698 OF 2020(J) 2

JUDGMENT Petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to dispose of Ext.P4 appeal preferred before the first 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 first respondent to take a decision on Ext.P4 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.3698 OF 2020(J) 3 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL), MALAPPURAM DATED 22.09.2008. EXHIBIT P2OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2017-2018 DATED 19.12.2019. EXHIBIT P3OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 19.12.2019. EXHIBIT P4OF THE APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 16.01.2020. EXHIBIT P5OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 17.01.2020.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →