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

WP(C)/5037/2020HC KeralaKLHC01013711202020 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.P2) within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. This decision is to be made in accordance with the law and after providing the petitioner an opportunity of hearing. Crucially, the Court directed that the disposal should not insist on the payment of 20% of the tax demanded, referencing a circular from 2017. Furthermore, the Court ordered that recovery proceedings pursuant to the assessment order (Ext.P1) shall be kept in abeyance until a decision is taken on the appeal. The principle established is that appellate authorities should dispose of pending appeals expeditiously, and recovery can be stayed pending such disposal, especially when a circular provides for waiver of pre-deposit in certain circumstances.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Ettumanoor Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., represented by its Secretary in Charge, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The petition sought a direction for the disposal of an appeal (Ext.P2) that was pending before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (third respondent). This appeal was filed against an assessment order (Ext.P1). The petitioner sought a speedy resolution of their appeal. The assessment year(s) and the specific amount in dispute are not recorded 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 Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) should be directed to dispose of the pending appeal filed by the petitioner? The petitioner contended that their appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) needs to be disposed of. The revenue's specific contentions are not recorded in the judgment. The judgment does not name any specific authorities, circulars, or precedents relied upon by either side, other than a general reference to a circular of 2017 regarding payment of 20% of the tax demanded.

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 THURSDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 1ST PHALGUNA, 1941 WP(C).No.5037 OF 2020(D) PETITIONER/S: ETTUMANOOR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., PEROOR ROAD, ETTUMANOOR, KOTTAYAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY IN CHARGE THUSHARA JOSEPH. BY ADV. SRI.S.ARUN RAJ RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -1, PUBLIC LIBRARY BUILDING, SASTRI ROAD, KOTTAYAM-686001. 2 THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NAGAMBADAM, KOTTAYAM-686002. 3 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), PUBLIC LIBRARY BUILDING, SASTRI ROAD, KOTTAYAM-686001. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.5037 OF 2020(D) 2

JUDGMENT Petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to dispose of Ext.P2 appeal preferred before the third 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 third respondent to take a decision on Ext.P2 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.5037 OF 2020(D) 3 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 29/12/2019 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE ACT FOR THE AY 2017-18. EXHIBIT P2OF THE FIRST APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2017-18. EXHIBIT P3OF THE STAY APPLICATION DATED 10/02/2020 FILED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2017-18. EXHIBIT P4OF THE ORDER DATED 11/02/2020 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER FOR THE AY 2017-18. EXHIBIT P5OF THE STAY APPLICATION FILED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2017-18. EXHIBIT P6OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 23/10/2019 PASSED BY THIS HONOURABLE COURT IN WPC NO.28170/2019 IN SIMILAR CASE.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →