KORATTY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED, vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/42063/2018HC KeralaKLHC01097499201821 December 2018Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the petitioner had availed its statutory remedy of appeal in time and had also filed a stay petition. The Court opined that procedural fairness necessitates that the revenue authorities should wait before taking further steps until the appellate authority decides on the stay petition. Therefore, the writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the respondent authority to defer coercive steps until the second respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)) considers the stay petition. The Court also expressed hope that the second respondent would dispose of the stay petition expeditiously. No issue was left undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Koratty Service Co-operative Bank Limited, an assessee under the Income Tax Act, 1961, filed an appeal against an assessment order (Ext.P1) before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the second respondent. Along with the appeal, the petitioner also filed a stay petition. The petitioner approached the High Court of Kerala through this writ petition, alleging that the revenue authorities were initiating coercive steps before the appellate authority could decide on the stay petition. The assessment year(s) are not specified. The dispute amount is not stated.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the revenue authorities should defer coercive steps until the appellate authority decides on the stay petition filed by the assessee? (Question of procedure and fairness). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that coercive steps were being taken prematurely, before the appellate authority had an opportunity to consider its stay petition. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the revenue.

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 DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU FRIDAY ,THE 21ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2018 / 30TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940 WP(C).No. 42063 of 2018 PETITIONER/S: KORATTY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED, KORATTY, THRISSUR-680 308, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY SRI.SANIL KUMAR.N.G. BY ADV. SRI.K.S.HARIHARAN NAIR RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(2), RANGE-2, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, SAKTHAN THAMPURAN NAGAR, THRISSUR, PIN-680 001. 2 THE COMMISISONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, SAKTHAN THAMURAN NAGAR, THRISSUR, PIN- 680 001. OTHER PRESENT: SRI JOSE JOSEPH, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21.12.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) No.42063/2018 -2-

J U D G M E N T The petitioner, an assessee under the Income Tax Act, 1961, questioned the Ext.P1 assessment order before the second respondent. The petitioner, in the appeal, filed a stay petition, too. Ventilating its grievance that the authorities are taking coercive steps before the appellate authority could consider the stay petition in the appeal, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

2.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel.

3.

I reckon the petitioner has exercised on time its statutory remedy of filing an appeal. It appears that it has also filed a stay petition. Procedural fairness demands that the authorities may wait, before taking further steps, until the appellate authority decides on the stay petition. Therefore, I dispose of the writ petition directing the respondent authority to defer coercive steps until the second

W.P.(C) No.42063/2018 -3- respondent considers the stay petition. I also hope that the second respondent will dispose of the stay petition expeditiously. DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU JUDGE jjj

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 03.12.2018 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12. EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF APPEAL MEMORANDUM DATED 18.12.2018 AGAINST EXT.P1. EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF THE STAY PETITION ON STATUTORY APPEAL BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR DATED 18.12.2018.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →