M/S.VELLINEZHI SERVICE CO-OP. BANK LTD. vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/8662/2018HC KeralaKLHC01040252201814 March 2018Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR5 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The provided text is an excerpt from the cause list of the High Court of Kerala, indicating that the writ petition was listed for admission on March 14, 2018. It does not contain the judgment of the court, nor does it detail any findings, reasoning, ratio decidendi, or operative directions. Therefore, what the Tribunal decided, the reasoning that led to it, the ratio, and the operative directions are not available in this excerpt. No issue was expressly left undecided as no decision has been recorded.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, M/s. Vellinezhi Service Co-op. Bank Ltd., represented by its Secretary, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The respondents are the Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Palakkad, and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The writ petition challenges an order or action by the revenue authorities. The specific assessment year(s) and the amount in dispute are not explicitly stated in the provided text. The procedural history leading to this writ petition is also not detailed.

What were the issues?

The High Court of Kerala was presented with a writ petition (Civil) No. 8662 of 2018. The core issue revolves around the challenge to an order or action by the Income Tax Officer and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The specific grounds of challenge and the arguments presented by both the petitioner (assessee) and the revenue are not detailed in the provided excerpt. Therefore, the exact questions of law or mixed law and fact that the Tribunal had to decide, and the specific contentions of each side, including any authorities, circulars, or precedents relied upon, cannot be ascertained from this text.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF MARCH 2018 / 23RD PHALGUNA, 1939 WP(C).No. 8662 of 2018 PETITIONER(S) M/S.VELLINEZHI SERVICE CO-OP. BANK LTD. SREE LAKSHMI COMPLEX, THIRUVAZHIYODE POST, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN-679514. REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY-SHRI.CHANDRAMOHAN T. BY ADVS.SRI.T.M.SREEDHARAN (SR.) SRI.V.P.NARAYANAN SMT.VANDANA MENON SMT.DIVYA RAVINDRAN SMT.S.SUJINI RESPONDENT(S): 1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -3, PALAKKAD. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) SAKTHAN THAMPURAN NAGAR, THRISSUR.680001. BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14-03-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No. 8662 of 2018 (G) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION DATED 16.5.2005 ISSUED BY THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL) PALAKKAD. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ASST. ORDER AND DEMAND NOTICE DATED 28.3.2016 FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2010-11 PASSED EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ASST. ORDER AND DEMAND NOTICE DATED 28.3.2016 FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2013-14 PASSED EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ASST. ORDER AND DEMAND NOTICE DATED 22.12.2016 FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2014-15 PASSED EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ASST. ORDER AND DEMAND NOTICE DATED 28.11.2017 FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2015-16 PASSED EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 23.4.2016 FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2010-11 SUBMITTED BY EXHIBIT P6(A) TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 23.4.2016 FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2010-11 SUBMITTED BY THE EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 23.4.2016 FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2013-14 SUBMITTED BY EXHIBIT P7(A) TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 23.4.2016 FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2013-14 SUBMITTED BY THE EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 24.1.2017 FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2014-15 SUBMITTED BY EXHIBIT P8(A) TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 24.1.2017 FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2013-14 SUBMITTED BY THE EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 4.1.2018 FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2015-16 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P9(A) TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 4.1.2018 FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2015-16 SUBMITTED BY THE

WP(C).No. 8662 of 2018 (G) EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF PETITION FILED U/S 220(6) OF THE ACT DATED 25.4.2016 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER 2010-11. EXHIBIT P10(A) TRUE COPY OF PETITION FILED U/S 220(6) OF THE ACT DATED 25.4.2016 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER 2013-14. EXHIBIT P10(B) TRUE COPY OF PETITION FILED U/S 220(6) OF THE ACT DATED 23.1.2017 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER 2014-15. EXHIBIT P10(C) TRUE COPY OF PETITION FILED U/S 220(6) OF THE ACT DATED 4.1.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER 2015-16. (true copy) Sd/- P.S. to Judge

P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J. ----------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.8662 of 2018 ----------------------------------------------- Dated 14th March, 2018. J U D G M E N T Petitioner is an assessee under the Income Tax Act (the Act) on the rolls of the first respondent. Aggrieved by Exts.P2 to P5 assessment orders, the petitioner preferred Exts.P6, P7, P8 and P9 appeals before the second respondent. Exts.P6(a), P7(a), P8(a) and P9(a) are the applications for stay preferred by the petitioner in the appeals. The grievance of the petitioner in the writ petition concerns the delay on the part of the second respondent in passing orders on Exts.P6(a), P7(a), P8(a) and P9(a) applications for stay. It is alleged by the petitioner in the writ petition that proceedings have already been initiated for realisation of the amounts covered by Exts.P2 to P5 orders. The petitioner, therefore, seeks appropriate directions in this regard, in this writ petition. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as

WPC No.8662/18

also the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the second respondent to take a decision on Exts.P6(a), P7(a), P8(a) and P9(a) applications for stay, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say that until orders are passed on the applications for stay, further proceedings for realisation of the amounts covered by Exts.P2 to P5 assessment orders shall be deferred. Sd/- P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE. tgs

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →