CHERTHALA TALUK AGRICULTURAL CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/3889/2020HC KeralaKLHC01010943202012 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 appeal (Ext.P3) in accordance with the law. This decision must be made after providing the petitioner with 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 Commissioner was directed not to insist on the 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 High 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, Cherthala Taluk Agricultural Credit Co-operative Society, 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) (second respondent). The appeal was filed against an assessment order (Ext.P1). The petitioner sought a direction for the timely disposal of this appeal. The assessment order was passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1 and TPS, Alappuzha (first respondent). The procedural history involves the filing of an appeal before the CIT(A) against the assessment order.

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? 2. Whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) should be directed to decide the appeal without insisting on the payment of 20% of the tax demanded, as per a 2017 circular? The petitioner argued for a direction to dispose of their appeal. The revenue's contentions are not explicitly recorded in the judgment. The judgment mentions that the court heard learned counsel on both sides, implying the revenue was represented and likely made submissions, but these are not detailed.

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 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 23RD MAGHA, 1941 WP(C).No.3889 OF 2020(I) PETITIONER/S: CHERTHALA TALUK AGRICULTURAL CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY H.W 11, CHERTHALA.P.O, ALAPPUZHA-688524 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY BY ADV. SRI.C.A.JOJO RESPONDENT/S: 1 INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 AND TPS, ALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA-688011 2 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOTTAYAM-686002 OTHER PRESENT: SC CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.3889 OF 2020(I) 2

JUDGMENT Petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to dispose of Ext.P3 appeal preferred before the second 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 second 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. sab AMIT RAWAL JUDGE

WP(C).No.3889 OF 2020(I) 3 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 AOF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR AY 2017 -18 DATED 13.12.2019 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDNET EXHIBIT P2 AOF THE DEMAND NOTICE U/S 156 DATED 13.12.2019 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P3 AOF THE APPEAL FOR AY 2017-18 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 17.01.2020 EXHIBIT P4 AOF THE NOTICE ISSUED B THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 03.02.2020 FOR 20% OF TAX

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →