BADAGARA CO:OPERATIVE RURAL BANK LTD: vs. INCOMETAX OFFICER:

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/5440/2018HC KeralaKLHC01037030201826 February 2018Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to decide the stay application preferred by the petitioner within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. The Court also ordered that further proceedings for the realization of amounts covered by the assessment order shall be deferred until orders are passed on the stay application. The High Court did not decide the merits of the appeal itself, focusing solely on procedural directions for the stay application and deferment of recovery.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Badagara Co-operative Rural Bank Ltd., is an assessee under the Income Tax Act. The petitioner is aggrieved by assessment orders for the assessment years 2014-15 and 2015-16, specifically Ext.P3 for 2015-16. The petitioner filed an appeal against Ext.P3 before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the second respondent, and also an application for stay. Proceedings for realization of amounts covered by the assessment order have been initiated. The petitioner filed this writ petition seeking appropriate directions regarding the pending appeal and stay application.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to appropriate directions from the High Court concerning their pending appeal and stay application before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner seeks directions for a speedy disposal of their appeal and stay application, as recovery proceedings have commenced. The petitioner relies on the general principle of expeditious disposal of appeals and the need for a stay to prevent coercive recovery measures. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the revenue. However, the revenue is represented by the Income Tax Department, and the court heard their standing counsel.

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 P.B.SURESH KUMAR MONDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2018 / 7TH PHALGUNA, 1939 WP(C).No. 5440 of 2018 PETITIONER(S) BADAGARA CO:OPERATIVE RURAL BANK LTD: 11/762: BANK BUILDING: V.O. ROAD: VADAKARA: 673101 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY SRI. K.P. PRADEEPKUMAR BY ADVS.SRI.P.RAGHUNATH SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN RESPONDENT(S): 1. INCOME TAX OFFICER: WAD 2 (2): KOZHIKODE: 673 001 2. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX: KOZHIKODE: 673 001 3. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS): KOZHIKODE: 673001 R BY SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26-02-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 5440 of 2018 (D) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS EXT.P1 PHOTOCOPY OF ORDER OF ITAT, COCHIN DT. 15.09.2016 IN ITA NOS. 53 TO 55/COCH/2016 EXT. P2 PHOTOCOPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR 2014.15 DT.16.12.2016 EXT.P3 PHOTOCOPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR 2015.16 DT. 26.12.2017 EXT.P4 PHOTOCOPY OF APPEAL FILED AGAINST EXT. P3 RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL //TRUE COPY// SD/- P.A. TO JUDGE SKS P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C).No.5440 of 2018 = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 26th day of February, 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 Ext.P3 assessment order, the petitioner preferred Ext.P4 appeal before the second respondent. After the institution of the writ petition, it stated that the petitioner preferred an application for stay in Ext.P4 appeal. It is alleged by the petitioner in the writ petition that proceedings have already been initiated for realisation of the amounts covered by Ext.P3 order. The petitioner, therefore, seeks appropriate directions in this regard, in this writ petition.

2.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as 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 the application for stay preferred by the petitioner in Ext.P4 appeal,

W.P. (c) No.5440/2018 -2- 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 application for stay, further proceedings for realisation of the amounts covered by Ext.P3 assessment order shall be deferred. P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE. SKS

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →