THE CHITTUR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO. 18 vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/2418/2020HC KeralaKLHC01006847202029 January 2020Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala, considering the facts and circumstances, directed the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to take up the stay application (Ext.P3) filed in the appeal (Ext.P2). The Commissioner is to pass orders on the stay application without undue delay, preferably within two months from the date of production of a certified copy of the judgment, after providing the petitioner a reasonable opportunity of being heard. Until such orders are passed on the stay application, further coercive steps for the enforcement of the impugned order are to be kept in abeyance. The High Court did not decide on the merits of the appeal or the stay application itself, but rather directed the appellate authority to expedite the decision on the stay.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, The Chittur Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. No. 18, is challenging an order (Ext.P1). They have filed an appeal (Ext.P2) and a stay petition (Ext.P3) before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The petitioner's primary grievance is that despite the pending stay petition, the assessing authority has initiated coercive recovery proceedings for the disputed amounts. The writ petition was filed before the High Court of Kerala seeking intervention in this matter.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the initiation of coercive recovery proceedings by the assessing authority during the pendency of a stay petition before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is legally tenable? (Question of law and fact) The petitioner's contention is that coercive recovery should be stayed pending the decision on their stay application. The revenue's arguments are not recorded in the judgment.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY 2020 / 9TH MAGHA, 1941 WP(C).No.2418 OF 2020(B) PETITIONER: THE CHITTUR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO. 18 CHITTUR, PALAKKAD - 678 101, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, NATARAJAN C., AGED 56, S/O. CHAMY K. BY ADVS. SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON SMT.MEERA V.MENON RESPONDENTS: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 5, AYAKAR BHAVAN, PALAKKAD - 670 014 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) SAKTHAN NAGAR, THRISSUR - 680 021 ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29.01.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No.2418 OF 2020(B) 2 ALEXANDER THOMAS, J. =========================== W.P(C) No.2418 of 2020 =========================== Dated this the 29th day of January, 2020 JUDGMENT Against Ext.P1 order, the petitioner has filed Ext.P2 appeal and Ext.P3 stay petition. The petitioner's grievance is that during the pendency of the stay petition, coercive recovery proceedings have been initiated by the assessing authority for recovery of the disputed amounts. 2. Heard Sri.Harisankar V.Menon, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.Jose Joseph, learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents. 3. After hearing both sides and after taking note of the facts and circumstances of the case, it is ordered in the interest of justice that the 2 nd respondent shall take up the matters in Ext.P3 stay application filed in Ext.P2 appeal and after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the petitioner through their authorised representative/counsel, if any, shall pass orders on that application without much delay, preferably within a period of two months from the date of production of a certified copy of this

WP(C).No.2418 OF 2020(B) 3 judgment. Until orders are thus passed on the abovesaid stay application, further coercive steps for enforcement of the impugned order will be kept in abeyance. With these observations and directions, the above Writ Petition (Civil) stands finally disposed of. Sd/- ALEXANDER THOMAS JUDGE vgd

WP(C).No.2418 OF 2020(B) 4 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2017-18 EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT - 2017-18 EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →