KUNNAMKULAM CO-OPERATIVE URBAN BANK vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX APPEALS

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/27560/2019HC KeralaKLHC01071701201916 October 2019Author: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR4 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala, considering the facts and circumstances and the submissions made, found it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with specific directions. The Court directed the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals (1st respondent) to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's appeal expeditiously, and at any rate, within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment, after hearing the petitioner. Furthermore, recovery steps for the amounts confirmed by the assessment order, including further proceedings pursuant to notices, were directed to be kept in abeyance until orders were passed by the 1st respondent and communicated to the petitioner. The petitioner was directed to produce copies of the writ petition and the judgment before the 1st respondent. The main issue in the appeal pertains to the claim for deduction under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, as indicated by the Court.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Kunnamkulam Co-operative Urban Bank Ltd., is aggrieved by an assessment order for assessment year 2010-2011. The petitioner has filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals (CIT(A)) and an application for stay of recovery. The petitioner's limited prayer is for a direction to the CIT(A) to expeditiously consider and pass orders on the appeal and to keep recovery proceedings in abeyance until the appeal is decided. The assessment order was passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward I, Guruvayoor, and the appeal is pending before the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals. The respondents are the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals, the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, and the Income Tax Officer.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to a direction for expeditious disposal of their appeal by the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals, and a stay of recovery proceedings pending the appeal's disposal? (Question of mixed law and fact, concerning procedural directions and recovery under the Income Tax Act). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner seeks a direction for expeditious disposal of their appeal and a stay of recovery proceedings. They rely on a Division Bench decision of the High Court of Kerala in similar circumstances where appellate authorities were directed to consider appeals and a stay was granted against recovery in the interregnum. Revenue's Contention: The judgment records that the learned Standing counsel appearing for the Income Tax Department was heard, but does not detail specific arguments made by the revenue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80P,Section 220(6)

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 A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 / 24TH ASWINA, 1941 WP(C).No.27560 OF 2019 PETITIONER: KUNNAMKULAM CO-OPERATIVE URBAN BANK LTD NO.698,KUNNAMKULAM, THRISSUR-680503 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRRETARY BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN RESPONDENTS: 1 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX APPEALS AAYAKAR BHAVAN,SHAKTAN NAGAR, THRISSUR -680001 2 THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AAYAKAR BHAVAN,SHAKTAN NAGAR, THRISSUR -680001 3. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD I, GURUVAYOOR-680101 BY ADV.SRI.JOSE JOSEPH,SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16.10.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.27560 OF 2019 2

JUDGMENT Aggrieved by Ext.P1 assessment order under the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2010-2011, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P3 appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals. He has also moved Ext.P5 application for stay before the 3rd respondent in terms of Section 220(6) of the Income Tax Act. The limited prayer of the petitioner is for a direction to the 1st respondent, before whom Ext.P3 appeal is pending, to consider and pass orders on the same expeditiously, after hearing him and to keep in abeyance recovery steps for recovery of amounts confirmed against the petitioner by Ext.P1 assessment order.

2.

I have heard Sri.P.C.Sasidharan, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and also Sri.Jose Joseph, the learned Standing counsel appearing for the Income Tax Department. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made across the bar, I find that the main issue in the appeal pertains to the claim for deduction under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act. In view of the decision of the Division Bench of this Court where, under similar circumstances, the appellate authorities were directed to consider the appeals preferred by the assessee, and a stay was granted against recovery proceedings in the interregnum, I deem it WP(C).No.27560 OF 2019 3 appropriate to dispose the writ petition with the following directions:

1.

The 1st respondent, before whom Ext.P3 appeal preferred by the petitioner against Ext.P1 assessment order is pending, shall consider and pass orders in the appeal expeditiously and at any rate within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner.

2.

Recovery steps for recovery of amounts confirmed against the petitioner by Ext.P1 assessment order, including further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P2 and P4 notices, shall be kept in abeyance till such time as orders are passed by the 1st respondent as directed above and the order communicated to the petitioner.

3.

The petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petition together with a copy of this judgment, before the 1st respondent, for further action. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR

JUDGE mns

WP(C).No.27560 OF 2019 4

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX PETITIONERS EXHIBITS EXHIBIT -P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 30.11.2018 EXHIBIT P2- TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 30.11.2018 EXHIBIT P3- TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL PREFERRED BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX APPEALS DATED 13.092019 EXHIBIT P4:TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 14.10.2019 EXHIBIT P5: TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 15.10.2019 EXHIBIT P6:TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C).NO.25262/2016 EXHIBIT P7: TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE AUDITED BALANCE SHEET RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE

More judgments on Section 80P

All 5,069 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80P →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →