THE SHOLAYOOR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/7765/2018HC KeralaKLHC01039355201808 March 20183 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the 2nd respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), to dispose of the stay application filed by the petitioner within two months from the date of notice to the petitioner. Furthermore, the Court ordered that all steps to recover the demand raised in the assessment order (Exhibit P1) shall be kept in abeyance until the disposal of the stay application. The reasoning is based on ensuring that the petitioner's right to seek a stay is addressed promptly and that coercive recovery measures are paused pending the decision on the stay.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, The Sholayoor Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., is challenging an assessment order (Exhibit P1) for the assessment year 2012-13, issued by the Income Tax Officer (1st respondent). The petitioner filed an appeal (Exhibit P2) and a stay petition before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (2nd respondent). This writ petition was filed seeking directions regarding the disposal of the appeal and stay application. The procedural history involves the issuance of the assessment order, the filing of the appeal and stay petition, and the current writ petition seeking expeditious disposal and interim relief.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the 2nd respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)) should be directed to dispose of the stay application filed by the petitioner within a specified period? (Question of procedure). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner seeks a direction for the expeditious disposal of their stay application. The petitioner relies on the fact that an appeal has been filed against the assessment order and a stay application has been moved. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the revenue regarding the disposal of the stay application. The revenue is represented by counsel, but their arguments on this specific issue are not detailed in the provided text.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE THURSDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF MARCH 2018 / 17TH PHALGUNA, 1939 WP(C).No. 7765 of 2018 PETITIONER(S) THE SHOLAYOOR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., KOTTATHARA P.O., ATTAPPADI, MANNARKKAD, PALAKKAD - 678 581, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, SANAL PAUL. BY ADVS.SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON SMT.MEERA V.MENON RESPONDENT(S): 1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, WARD NO. 4, PALAKKAD - 678 001. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, ERNAKULAM - 682 036. R BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX GOVERNMENT PLEADER M.M. JASMINE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08-03-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No. 7765 of 2018 (U) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2012-13. EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER FOR THE YEAR 2012-13. EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER FOR THE YEAR 2012-13. EB //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE

A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J. ----------------------------------------------- W.P. (C) No. 7765 of 2018 ----------------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of March, 2018 J U D G M E N T The petitioner as against Ext. P1 assessment order preferred Ext. P2 appeal before the 2nd respondent appellate authority. Petitioner also moved a stay application. 2. In view of the above, there shall be a direction to the 2nd respondent to dispose of the application within 2 months after notice to the petitioner. Till disposal of stay application, all steps to recover the demand pursuant to Ext. P1 assessment order shall be kept in abeyance. The writ petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/- A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE JUDGE eb

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →