THE MANGALAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the first respondent, to consider and dispose of the statutory appeals filed by the petitioner at the earliest. The Court also directed that recovery proceedings and the collection of tax assessed should be kept in abeyance pending the disposal of these appeals. This decision was made taking note of the Full Bench decision reported in The Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Calicut [2019 (2) KHC 287] and the admission by the revenue that the facts were similar to a previous Division Bench judgment. The ratio decidendi is that statutory appeals should be disposed of expeditiously, and recovery should be stayed during the pendency of such appeals, especially when facts are similar to precedents.
What were the facts?
The petitioner, The Mangalam Service Co-operative Bank Limited, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The petitioner sought directions for the disposal of their statutory appeals pending before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The petitioner relied on a previous judgment by a Division Bench in W.A. No. 1536 of 2019, which directed the disposal of appeals and granted a stay on recovery proceedings during the pendency of the appeals. The Standing Counsel for the respondents admitted that the facts of the present case were substantially similar to those in the cited Division Bench judgment.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) should be directed to dispose of the statutory appeals filed by the petitioner at the earliest? (Question of procedure) 2. Whether recovery proceedings and collection of tax assessed should be kept in abeyance pending the disposal of the statutory appeals? (Question of procedure) Assessee's Contention: The petitioner relied on the judgment in W.A. No. 1536 of 2019 and connected cases, arguing that the Division Bench had directed the disposal of appeals and granted a stay of recovery proceedings during the pendency of the appeals. Revenue's Contention: The Standing Counsel for the respondents admitted that the facts of the case were substantially the same as those noted by the Division Bench in W.A. No. 1536 of 2019 and agreed that the said judgment could be followed.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Heard together (2 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI FRIDAY, THE 07TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 18TH MAGHA, 1941 WP(C).No.3476 OF 2020(H) PETITIONER/S: THE MANGALAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED NO.9701, MANGALAM P O, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-676561, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. BY ADV. SRI.O.D.SIVADAS RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AYAKAR BHAVAN, KOZHIKODE, PIN-673001. 2 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD I AND TPS, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-676001. OTHER PRESENT: JOS WINSON FOR CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-2- J U D G M E N T Dated this the 7th day of February 2020 Heard Advocate O.D.Sivadas, counsel for petitioner and Advocate Jose Winson holding for Advocate Christopher Abraham, Standing Counsel for respondents.
Petitioner refers to and relies on judgment dated 01.07.2019 in W.A No.1536 of 2019 and connected cases to contend that the Division Bench directed disposal of appeal and granted stay of recovery proceedings during the pendency of the appeal.
The learned Standing Counsel admits that the facts of the case are substantially same and similar to the facts noted by the Division Bench in W.A. No.1536 of 2019, hence can be followed.
-3- Hence, the writ petition is disposed of directing the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/ 1st respondent to consider and dispose of the statutory appeals filed by the petitioner herein at the earliest taking note of the Full Bench decision reported in The Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd, v. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Calicut [2019 (2) KHC 287] and to keep in abeyance recovery proceedings and collection of tax assessed, pending disposal of such appeals. S.V.BHATTI JUDGE jjj -4-
Appendix — schedule of exhibits
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Mascot Constructions Co. And Another vs. The Commissioner Of Goods And Services Tax (GST) And AnotherBombay · 22 Oct 2026
- Ankil Jagdishchandra Kholwadwala vs. Union Of INDIA And AnrBombay · 22 Oct 2026
- Fasil Hussain Shah vs. Ut Of J And K Th Commissioner Secretary TO Government Finance Department And OthersJammu and Kashmir and Ladakh · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S. Devkinandan Traders vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S Dixit Medical Agencies vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
