M/S. KODAKARA FARMERS SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/11694/2017HC KeralaKLHC01059641201704 April 2017Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the appellate authority (the 2nd respondent) to consider and dispose of the petitioner's stay application (Ext.P4) along with the delay condonation application (Ext.P3) within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the judgment. Furthermore, the Court ordered that coercive proceedings against the petitioner be stayed until such orders are passed by the appellate authority. The order passed by the appellate authority on the stay and delay condonation applications will determine the matter thereafter. The High Court did not decide on the merits of the assessment order or the appeal itself, focusing solely on the procedural aspect of disposing of the pending applications.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, M/s. Kodakara Farmers Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., Thrissur, received an assessment order for the assessment year 2009-10 on December 6, 2016. The petitioner filed an appeal against this order before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) on January 31, 2017, along with an application to condone the delay in filing the appeal and a stay petition. While these applications were pending, coercive proceedings were initiated against the petitioner. The petitioner filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala seeking a direction for the disposal of their pending applications.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appellate authority should consider and dispose of the stay application and the delay condonation application filed by the petitioner? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that their appeal, stay petition, and delay condonation application were pending before the appellate authority. They also contended that coercive proceedings were initiated while these applications were under consideration, necessitating judicial intervention. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the revenue regarding the issues raised by the petitioner.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF APRIL 2017/14TH CHAITHRA, 1939 WP(C).No. 11694 of 2017 (J) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------- M/S. KODAKARA FARMERS SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., KODAKARA, THRISSUR-680684, REPRESENTED BY V.D. BIJU, MANAGING DIRECTOR IN CHARGE.

BY ADVS.SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON SMT.MEERA V.MENON RESPONDENT(S): -------------- 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(5), THRISSUR-2, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, SAKTHAN NAGAR, THRISSUR-680001. 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, THRISSUR-680001.

BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04-04-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: EL

WP(C).No. 11694 of 2017 (J) ---------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ----------------------- P1 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2009-10 DATED 06.12.2016 P2 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 31.01.2017 P3 COPY OF DELAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 31.01.2017 P4 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 31.01.2017 P5 COPY OF LETTER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 27.03.2017 RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS ----------------------- NIL TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE EL

K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J. ===================== W.P.(C)No.11694 of 2017 - J ======================== Dated this the 04th day of April, 2017 J U D G M E N T Ext.P1 is the assessment order passed against the petitioner for the assessment year 2009-10. Against which order, petitioner filed Ext.P2 appeal, which is accompanied by Ext.P4 stay petition and also Ext.P3 application to condone delay in filing appeal, before the 2nd respondent Tribunal. Appeal and stay petition are pending before the 2nd respondent. In the meanwhile, coercive proceedings have been initiated. It is in this context, the writ petition has been filed. 2. In the above circumstances, it is directed that the appellate authority, the 2nd respondent herein, shall consider and dispose of Ext.P4 stay application together with Ext.P3 delay condonation application, within a period of two months

2 W.P.(C)No.11694/2017 from the date of receipt of a certified coy of this judgment and the coercive proceedings be stayed until such orders are passed, which order shall determine the matter thereafter. The writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE SB/04/04/2017 // true copy // P.A to Judge

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →