KERALA STATE AGRICULTURAL AND RURUAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1)

WP(C)/5223/2015HC KeralaKLHC01051063201519 February 2015Author: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR5 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The provided text does not contain the High Court's decision on any issues, the reasoning behind it, or the ratio decidendi. Consequently, there are no operative directions or notes on undecided issues to report. The judgment is incomplete in this regard.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Kerala State Co-operative Agricultural & Rural Development Bank Ltd., filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala challenging an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Cochin Bench. The ITAT's order is the subject of the challenge. The specific assessment year(s) and the amount in dispute are not explicitly stated in the provided text. The procedural history leading to the ITAT's order is also not detailed.

What were the issues?

The provided text does not contain the specific issues that the High Court had to decide, nor does it record the arguments presented by the petitioner (assessee) or the respondent (revenue). Therefore, no questions of law or mixed law and fact can be identified, and no contentions or reliance on authorities can be reported.

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 THURSDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2015/30TH MAGHA, 1936 WP(C).No. 5223 of 2015 (C) --------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- M/S.KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL & RURUAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD., POST BOX NO.56, STATUE JUNCTION, TRIVANDRUM, REPRESENTED BY GENERAL MANAGER(I/C). BY ADVS.SRI.ANIL D. NAIR SRI.R.SREEJITH SMT.C.S.SULEKHA BEEVI SMT.ROSIE ATHULYA JOSEPH KUM.SOUMYA PRAKASH RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 003. 2. THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, COCHIN BENCH, KENDRIYA BHAVAN, KAKKANAD - 682 030. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.S.SUDHEESH KUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19-02-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: mbr/ WP(C).No. 5223 of 2015 (C) -------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: ----------------------------------- EXHIBIT P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 30.12.2013 FOR THE YEAR 2011-12 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) DATED 28.11.2014 FOR THE YEAR 2011-12. EXHIBIT P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4 : TRUE COPY OF ORDER GIVING EFFECT BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P5 : TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 12.1.2015 FOR THE YEAR 2011-12 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P6 : TRUE COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P7 : TRUE COPY OF GARNISHEE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CATHOLIC SYRIAN BANK LTD., TRIVANDRUM. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: - NIL -------------------------------------- /TRUE COPY/ P.S. TO JUDGE mbr/ A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J. ........................................................ W.P.(C).No.5223 of 2015 ......................................................... Dated this the 19th day of February, 2015

J U D G M E N T

Against Ext.P2 order of the First Appellate Authority under the Income Tax Act, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P3 appeal and Ext.P6 stay petition before the 2nd respondent. It is the case of the petitioner that pending consideration of the stay petition by the 2nd respondent, the respondents have initiated garnishee proceedings through Ext.P7 notice.

Heard Sri.Anil. D.Nair, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Sudheesh Kumar, the learned Government Pleader for the respondents.

On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made across the Bar, I dispose the writ petition with the following directions: i. The 2nd respondent shall consider and pass orders on Ext.P6 stay petition within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner. ii. Recovery steps for recovery of amounts confirmed against the petitioner by the assessment order including further steps pursuant to Ext.P7 notice shall be kept in abeyance till orders are passed by the 2nd respondent

as directed

above

and communicated to the petitioner. iii. The order to be passed by the 2nd respondent shall be a reasoned one adverting to the contentions of the petitioner regarding existence of a prima facie case for a stay of recovery pending disposal of the appeal. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE mns/

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →