SOORANAD GRAMADHARANA SERVICE CO OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO. 3974 vs. THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES

WP(C)/2742/2020HC KeralaKLHC01007824202031 January 2020Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS4 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala, in the interest of justice, directed the 3rd respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), to take up the stay application (Ext.P4) filed in the appeal (Ext.P2). The 3rd respondent was instructed to afford a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and pass orders on the stay application without much delay, preferably within two months from the date of production of a certified copy of the judgment. Until orders were passed on the stay application, further coercive steps for the enforcement of the impugned order were ordered to be kept in abeyance. The writ petition was disposed of with these observations and directions. No specific issue was left undecided, as the court provided a clear procedural path forward.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Sooranad Gramadhaarana Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., filed a writ petition challenging an order (Ext.P1). The petitioner had preferred an appeal (Ext.P2) and filed a stay petition (Ext.P4) against the impugned order. The petitioner's primary grievance was that despite the pendency of the stay petition before the 3rd respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)), coercive recovery proceedings were initiated by the assessing authority for the disputed amounts. The writ petition was filed seeking appropriate directions to address this situation.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the 3rd respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)) should be directed to expeditiously decide the stay application filed by the petitioner pending their appeal. 2. Whether further coercive recovery proceedings should be kept in abeyance until the stay application is decided. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that coercive recovery proceedings were initiated while their stay petition was pending before the appellate authority, causing prejudice. They sought a direction for the speedy disposal of the stay application and a stay on recovery. Revenue's Contention: The judgment records that the learned Standing Counsel appeared for the respondents. No specific arguments or contentions for the revenue were recorded in the judgment.

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 ALEXANDER THOMAS FRIDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF JANUARY 2020 / 11TH MAGHA, 1941 WP(C).No.2742 OF 2020(P) PETITIONER/S: SOORANAD GRAMADHARANA SERVICE CO OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO. 3974 NO.3947,SOORANAD SOUTH,ANAYADI.P.O,KOLLAM- 690561,REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY DIVYA.D.L. BY ADV. DR.K.P.PRADEEP RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES MINISTRY OF FINANCE,GOVERNMENT OF INDIA,NORTH BLOCK,NEW DELHI-110001,RE PRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN. 2 INCOME TAX OFFICER, KOLLAM CIRCLE AAYAKKAR BHAVAN, INCOME TAX OFFICE,NEAR KARBALA JUNCTION,RAILWAY STATION ROAD, KOLLAM-691001. 3 COMMISSIONER OF INOME TAX(APPEALS), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,AAYAKAR BHAVAN,INCOME TAX OFFICE,KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695003. OTHER PRESENT: SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31.01.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.2742 OF 2020(P) 2 ALEXANDER THOMAS, J. ----------------------------------------- W.P.(C.) No. 2742 of 2020 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 31st day of January, 2020

JUDGMENT Against Ext.P1 order, the petitioner has filed Ext.P2 appeal and Ext.P4 stay petition. The petitioner's grievance is that during the pendency of the stay petition, coercive recovery proceedings have been initiated by the assessing authority for recovery of the disputed amounts. Heard Sri.Dr.K.P.Pradeep, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.Christopher Abraham, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents. After hearing both sides and after taking note of the facts and circumstances of the case, it is ordered in the interest of justice that the 3rd respondent shall take up the matters in Ext.P4 stay application filed in Ext.P2 appeal and after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the petitioner through their authorised representative/ counsel, if any, shall pass orders on those applications without much delay, preferably within a period of two months from the date of production of a certified copy of this judgment. Until orders are thus passed on the abovesaid stay application, further coercive steps for enforcement of the impugned order

WP(C).No.2742 OF 2020(P) 3 will be kept in abeyance. With these observations and directions, the above Writ Petition (Civil) stands finally disposed of.

ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE SKS

WP(C).No.2742 OF 2020(P) 4

Appendix — schedule of exhibits

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO.AAHAS9896B/2017-18 DATED 24.12.2019 ISSUED FOR THE YEAR 2017-18 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 21.01.2020 FILED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2017-18 EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE OF PAN AAHAS9896B/2017-18 DATED 24.12.2019 FOR THE YEAR 2017-18 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY APPLICATION FILED ON 21.01.20209 BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT IN EXT P2 APPEAL.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →