THE VAMANAPURAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.927 vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/33349/2019HC KeralaKLHC01087084201906 December 2019Author: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition with specific directions. Firstly, the 2nd respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), was directed to consider and pass reasoned orders on the stay petitions (Exts.P8 and P10) within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment, after providing a hearing to the petitioner. Secondly, recovery steps for the amounts confirmed by the penalty orders (Exts.P1 and P2), including further proceedings pursuant to garnishee notices (Exts.P11 and P12), were ordered to be kept in abeyance until such time as orders are passed by the 2nd respondent as directed and communicated to the petitioner. It was clarified that during the period the stay granted by the court is in operation, the petitioner would be permitted to operate its bank account covered by the garnishee notices. The petitioner was also directed to furnish a copy of the writ petition and the judgment to the 2nd respondent.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, The Vamanapuram Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd., filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The petitioner had preferred appeals against penalty orders (Exts.P1 and P2) and filed stay petitions (Exts.P8 and P10) before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the 2nd respondent. The petitioner contended that recovery steps were being taken for the amounts confirmed by the penalty orders, even before the stay petitions were considered. The petitioner sought directions for the appellate authority to consider the stay petitions and to keep recovery steps in abeyance. The respondents are the Income Tax Officer and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), along with a third party, The Thiruvananthapuram District Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the 2nd respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)) should be directed to consider and pass reasoned orders on the stay petitions (Exts.P8 and P10) filed by the petitioner within a specified period. 2. Whether recovery steps for the amounts confirmed by the penalty orders (Exts.P1 and P2), including proceedings pursuant to garnishee notices (Exts.P11 and P12), should be kept in abeyance until orders are passed on the stay petitions. Assessee's Contentions: The petitioner argued that recovery steps were being initiated prematurely, even before the appellate authority had an opportunity to decide on the stay petitions. They sought a directive for the expeditious disposal of the stay petitions and a temporary halt to recovery proceedings. Revenue's Contentions: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the revenue (R1 & R2) or the third respondent (R3) in response to the writ petition. The court heard the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

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 A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 06TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2019 / 15TH AGRAHAYANA, 1941 WP(C).No.33349 OF 2019(P) PETITIONER/S: THE VAMANAPURAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.927 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VAMANAPURAM P. O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT - 695 606. BY ADVS. SRI.ARJUN RAGHAVAN SRI.ADITHYA RAJEEV RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -2(3), OFFICE OF THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE - 2, 1ST FLOOR, AYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT - 695 003. 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM ISTRICT - 695 003. 3 THE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER, HEAD OFFICE, EAST FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 023. R1 & R2 BY SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM,SC R3 BY SRI.THOMAS ABRAHAM, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.12.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.33349 OF 2019(P) 2

JUDGMENT Against Exts.P1 and P2 penalty orders under the Income Tax Act, the petitioner has preferred Exts.P7 and P9 appeals together with Exts.P8 and P10 stay petitions before the 2nd respondent appellate authority. It is the case of the petitioner that even prior to considering the stay petition, recovery steps are taken by the respondents against the petitioner for recovery of the amounts confirmed by Exts.P1 and P2 penalty orders.

2.

I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made across the Bar, I dispose the writ petition with the following directions:

1.

The 2nd respondent shall consider and pass reasoned orders on Exts.P8 and P10 stay petitions within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner.

2.

Recovery steps for recovery of amounts confirmed against the petitioner by Exts.P1 and P2 assessment orders including further proceedings pursuant to Exts.P11 and P12 garnishee notices shall be kept in abeyance till such time as orders are passed by the 2nd respondent as directed above and communicated to the petitioner. It is made clear that during the period when the stay granted by this Court is in WP(C).No.33349 OF 2019(P) 3 operation, the petitioner is permitted to operate its bank account covered by Exts.P11 and P12. 3. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petition together with a copy of this judgment, before the 2nd respondent, for further action. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE

WP(C).No.33349 OF 2019(P) 4

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 22.5.2018, ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 271 B IMPOSING PENALTY FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011 - 2012. EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 22.5.2018, ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 271 B IMPOSING PENALTY FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015 - 2016. EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 8.11.2019, ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011 - 2012. EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 8.11.2019, ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015 - 2016. EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 13.11.2019, ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011 - 2012. EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 13.11.2019, ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015 - 2016. EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE ONLINE APPEAL ALONG WITH GROUNDS OF APPEAL AND COVERING LETTER DATED 18.11.2019, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011 - 2012. EXHIBIT P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED ALONG WITH EXT.P7 APPEAL DATED 4.12.2019. EXHIBIT P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE ONLINE APPEAL ALONG WITH GROUNDS OF APPEAL AND COVERING LETTER DATED 18.11.2019, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015 - 2016. EXHIBIT P10 A TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED ALONG WITH EXT. P9 APPEAL DATED 4.12.2019. EXHIBIT P11 A TRUE COPY OF THE GARNISHEE NOTICE DATED 18.11.2019 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P12 A TRUE COPY OF THE GARNISHEE NOTICE DATED 19.11.2019 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT. sd

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →