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

WP(C)/3395/2020HC KeralaKLHC01009770202007 February 2020Author: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI4 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to consider and dispose of the statutory appeal filed by the petitioner at the earliest. The Court also ordered that recovery proceedings and collection of tax assessed be kept in abeyance pending the disposal of the appeal. This decision was made taking note of the Full Bench decision in The Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Calicut [2019 (2) KHC 287] and the admission by the revenue that the facts were substantially similar to a previous Division Bench judgment which granted similar relief. The ratio decidendi is that when facts are similar to a precedent and no opposition is raised, statutory appeals should be expedited, and recovery stayed to avoid prejudice to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, The Manakara Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., represented by its Secretary, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The petitioner sought directions regarding its pending statutory appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The petitioner relied on a Division Bench judgment dated July 1, 2019, in W.A. No. 1529 of 2019 and connected cases, which directed the disposal of appeals and granted a stay of recovery during their pendency. The Income Tax Officer and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) were the respondents. The learned Standing Counsel for the respondents admitted that the facts of the present case were substantially similar to those in the cited Division Bench judgment.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) should be directed to consider and dispose of the statutory appeal filed by the petitioner at the earliest, considering the Full Bench decision in The Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Calicut [2019 (2) KHC 287]? (Question of law and fact, relying on principles of natural justice and administrative efficiency). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner contended that based on the Division Bench judgment in W.A. No. 1529 of 2019, the appeals should be disposed of and recovery stayed pending appeal. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, through its Standing Counsel, admitted that the facts were similar to the cited case and did not oppose the petitioner's prayer for disposal of the appeal and stay of recovery.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Heard together (2 matters)

WP(C).No.3395 OF 2020

W.A No.1529 of 2019

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI FRIDAY, THE 07TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 18TH MAGHA, 1941 WP(C).No.3395 OF 2020(Y) PETITIONER/S: THE MANAKARA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. MANKARA P.O., PALAKKAD-678 643, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, P.BABU BY ADVS. SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON SMT.MEERA V.MENON RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, WARD NO.1, PALAKKAD-678 001 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, THRISSUR-680 001 OTHER PRESENT: SC NAVANEETH N NATH FOR JOSE JOSEPH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No.3395 OF 2020(Y) 2 JUDGMENT Dated this the 7

th day of February, 2020 Heard Harisankar V. Menon, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Navaneeth N. Nath holding for Sri. Jose Joseph, the learned Standing Counsel for respondents.

Petitioner refers to and relies on judgment dated 01.07.2019 in W.A No.1529 of 2019 and connected cases to contend that the Division Bench directed disposal of appeals and granted stay of recovery during the pendency of the appeals.

The learned Standing Counsel admits that the facts of the case are substantially same and similar to the facts noted by the Division Bench in W.A.No.1529/2019, hence can be followed. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of directing the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/ 2nd respondent to consider and dispose of the statutory appeal filed by the petitioner herein at the earliest taking note of the Full Bench decision reported in The Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd, v. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Calicut [2019 (2) KHC 287] and to keep in abeyance recovery proceedings and WP(C).No.3395 OF 2020(Y) 3 collection of tax assessed, pending disposal of such appeal. S.V.BHATTI Dxy JUDGE

WP(C).No.3395 OF 2020(Y) 4

Appendix — schedule of exhibits

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT 2017-18 EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →