THE CHIRAKKARA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO. 1894, vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,

WP(C)/4673/2020HC KeralaKLHC01012753202019 February 2020Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL3 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the 2nd respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), to decide the appeal (Ext.P3) in accordance with the law. This decision is to be made after providing the petitioner an opportunity of hearing. The Court specified that the decision should be taken within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Crucially, the Court directed that the appeal should be decided without insisting on the payment of 20% of the tax demanded, as per a circular issued in 2017. Furthermore, recovery proceedings pursuant to the assessment order are to be kept in abeyance until a decision is taken on the appeal. The ratio decidendi is that appellate authorities should dispose of appeals expeditiously and that interim relief in terms of keeping recovery proceedings in abeyance can be granted, particularly when a specific circular allows for waiver of pre-deposit under certain circumstances.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, The Chirakkara Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd., filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala seeking a direction for the disposal of its appeal (Ext.P3) pending before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (2nd respondent). The appeal was filed against an assessment order (Ext.P1) passed by the Income Tax Officer (1st respondent). The petitioner sought a directive for the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to decide the appeal expeditiously. The Court heard both parties and issued directions regarding the disposal of the appeal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the 2nd respondent/Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) should be directed to dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioner. Assessee's contention: The petitioner sought a direction for the expeditious disposal of its appeal pending before the 2nd respondent. Revenue's contention: No specific contentions are recorded for the revenue in the judgment. The judgment indicates that the matter was heard on admission, suggesting the revenue may have been represented or their position considered during 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 WEDNESDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 30TH MAGHA, 1941 WP(C).No.4673 OF 2020(H) PETITIONER: THE CHIRAKKARA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO. 1894, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, CHIRAKKARA P.O., KALLUVATHUKKAL, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691578. BY ADVS. SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR SRI.ARJUN RAGHAVAN RESPONDENTS: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 AND TPS, OFFICE OF THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLLAM RANGE, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KARBALA JUNCTION, KOLLAM, PIN-691001. 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN- 695003. 3 THE KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK, (FORMERLY KNOWN AS KOLLAM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK), CHATHANNOOR BRANCH, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691572, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER. SRI CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM,SC,GILBERT GEORGE CORREYA,SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.4673 OF 2020(H) 2

JUDGMENT Petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to dispose of Ext.P3 appeal preferred before the 2nd 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 2nd respondent to take a decision on Ext.P3 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 nak JUDGE

WP(C).No.4673 OF 2020(H) 3 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 AOF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER OF THE YEAR 2017-2018 DATED 21/11/2019. EXHIBIT P2 AOF THE NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SECTION 156 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT DATED 21/11/2019. EXHIBIT P3 AOF THE ONLINE APPEAL DATED 30/11/2019 ALONG WITH GROUNDS OR APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT, AGAINST EXT.P1 ASSESSMENT ORDER. EXHIBIT P4 AOF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN EXT.P3 APPEAL DATED 07/01/2020. EXHIBIT P5 AOF THE NOTICE NO. ITBA/RCV/S/226(3)-1/2019- 20/1025058659(1) DATED 12/02/2020 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P6 AOF THE JUDGMENT DATED 19/07/2019 IN WA NO.1639/2019. EXHIBIT P7 AOF THE JUDGMENT DATED 25/11/2019 IN WPC NO.31787/2019. //// P.A TO JUDGE

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →