AIDED PRIMARY TEACHERS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. NO.K-334 vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court directed the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to decide the appeal (Ext.P2) in accordance with the law. This decision is to be made after providing the petitioner an opportunity of hearing. The disposal is to be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Crucially, the Court directed that the appeal should not be insisted upon for payment of 20% of the tax demanded, referencing a circular from 2017. Furthermore, recovery proceedings pursuant to the assessment order are to be kept in abeyance until a decision is taken on the appeal. The Court did not decide on the merits of the appeal itself, but rather on the procedural aspect of its timely disposal.
What were the facts?
The petitioner, Aided Primary Teachers Co-operative Society Ltd., filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala seeking a direction to dispose of their appeal (Ext.P2) filed before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (the first respondent). The appeal was against an assessment order (Ext.P1) passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Kottayam (the second respondent). The petitioner sought a timely decision on their appeal. The assessment year(s) are not specified in the judgment. The amount in dispute is not stated.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the High Court should direct the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to dispose of the pending appeal filed by the petitioner? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner sought a direction for the timely disposal of their appeal before the first respondent. They relied on a circular of 2017 regarding the payment of 20% of the tax demanded. Revenue's Contention: The judgment records that the learned counsel for both sides were heard, but it does not explicitly detail the revenue's specific arguments beyond their participation in the hearing.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
JUDGMENT Petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to dispose of Ext.P2 appeal preferred before the first 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 first 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. sab AMIT RAWAL JUDGE
WP(C).No.4940 OF 2020(N) 3 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 28.12.2019. EXHIBIT P2OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM DATED 29.1.2020. EXHIBIT P3OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 4.2.2020. EXHIBIT P4OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 3.9.2018. EXHIBIT P5 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WRIT APPEAL 1529/2019 DATED 1.7.2019. EXHIBIT P6OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 28.12.2020.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Piyush Shantilal Veera vs. State Of U.P.Allahabad · 23 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Pooja Shri Traders vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - 1Madras · 23 Oct 2026
- Aashutosh vs. The State Of Madhy PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 23 Oct 2026
- M/S Barnala Steel Industries Private Limited vs. State Of Uttar Pradesh And 2 OthersAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- Skd Suppliers Private Limited vs. The Superintendent, Central CGST, Rishra Division, Range-Ii, And AnrCalcutta · 22 Oct 2026