KODAKARA AND MATTATHU CO-OPERATIVE SOCIAL WELFARE MULTIPURPOSE SOCIETY LTD. NO. R 1215, vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,

WP(C)/4387/2020HC KeralaKLHC01012191202017 February 2020Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL3 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the second respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), to decide the appeals (Exts.P3 and P7) in accordance with the law. This decision is to be made after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The Court specified that the disposal should occur within three months from the date of receiving a copy of the judgment. Crucially, the Court directed that the appeals should be decided without insisting on the payment of 20% of the tax demanded, as per a circular issued in 2017. Furthermore, recovery proceedings initiated pursuant to the assessment orders are to be kept in abeyance until a decision is reached on the appeals. The principle established is that appellate authorities should dispose of pending appeals expeditiously, and recovery can be stayed pending such disposal, especially when a specific circular permits waiver of pre-deposit under certain circumstances.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Kodakara and Mattathur Co-operative Social Welfare Multipurpose Society Ltd., represented by its Secretary, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The petition sought a direction for the disposal of appeals (Exts.P3 and P7) filed before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2 (the second respondent). These appeals were against assessment orders (Exts.P1 and P5) passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward -2 (2), Thrissur (the first respondent). The assessment years are not specified in the judgment. The procedural history involves the filing of appeals against assessment orders, and the present writ petition is to expedite the decision on these pending appeals.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should direct the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to dispose of the pending appeals filed by the petitioner? The petitioner contended that their appeals (Exts.P3 and P7) against the assessment orders (Exts.P1 and P5) have not been decided by the second respondent. They sought a direction for the expeditious disposal of these appeals. The revenue, represented by the Standing Counsel, was heard. The judgment does not explicitly record the revenue's specific arguments against the direction for disposal, but it implies their participation in the proceedings before the High Court.

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 MONDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 28TH MAGHA, 1941 WP(C).No.4387 OF 2020(W) PETITIONER/S: KODAKARA AND MATTATHUR CO-OPERATIVE SOCIAL WELFARE MULTIPURPOSE SOCIETY LTD. NO. R 1215, KODAKARA P.O., THRISSUR-680 684, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY BY ADVS. SRI.C.A.JOJO SMT.SWATHY S. RESPONDENT/S: 1 INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -2 (2), THRISSUR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, NEAR SHAKTHANTHAMPURAN NAGAR, THRISSUR-680001 2 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-2, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL REVENUE TOWER, THRISSUR-680 001 OTHER PRESENT: SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.4387 OF 2020(W) 2

JUDGMENT Petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to dispose of Exts.P3 and P7 appeals preferred before the second respondent/Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) against the assessment orders Exts.P1 and P5. 2. Having heard the learned counsel on both sides, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the second respondent to take a decision on Exts.P3 and P7 appeals 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 orders shall be kept in abeyance. AMIT RAWAL sab JUDGE

WP(C).No.4387 OF 2020(W) 3 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 AOF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AY 2012-13 DATED 11.12.2019 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P2 AOF THE DEMAND NOTICE U/S. 156 DATED 11.12.2019 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P3 AOF THE APPEAL FOR AY 2012-13 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 15.01.2020 EXHIBIT P4 AOF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 30.01.2020 FOR 20% OF TAX EXHIBIT P5 AOF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR AY 214-15 DATED 11.12.2019 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P6 AOF THE DEMAND NOTICE U/S. 156 DATED 11.12.2019 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P7 AOF THE APPEAL FOR AY 214-15 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 13.01.2020 EXHIBIT P8 AOF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 28/.01.2020 FOR 20% OF TAX

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →