THALAPPILLY TALUK PRIMARY COOPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD. vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP(C)/27582/2022HC KeralaKLHC01058414202226 August 2022Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.4 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court, considering the limited nature of the relief sought, disposed of the writ petition. The Court directed the 2nd respondent (Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax) to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's rectification application (Ext.P2) in accordance with law. This consideration must include affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and should be completed within one month of receiving a certified copy of the judgment. Crucially, the Court ordered that all proceedings for recovery of amounts due under the assessment order (Ext.P1) shall be kept in abeyance until an order is passed on the rectification application. The principle here is that procedural fairness and the opportunity to rectify an assessment should precede coercive recovery actions.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Thalappilly Taluk Primary Cooperative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank Ltd., filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam. The petitioner was apprehending recovery proceedings for amounts due under an assessment order (Ext.P1). The petitioner had also filed a petition for rectification before the assessing authority, the 2nd respondent. The core of the petition was to request that recovery proceedings be kept in abeyance pending the consideration of the rectification petition. The respondents were the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, both from Thrissur.

What were the issues?

1. Whether recovery proceedings for amounts due under an assessment order should be kept in abeyance pending the consideration of a rectification petition filed by the assessee? (Question of mixed law and fact, concerning principles of natural justice and procedural fairness). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that recovery proceedings should be stayed pending the disposal of their rectification application. They sought to prevent immediate recovery actions while their request for correction of the assessment order was under consideration. Revenue's Contention: The learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Department appeared. No specific arguments were recorded for the revenue regarding the stay of recovery proceedings or the rectification petition.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. FRIDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 4TH BHADRA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 27582 OF 2022 PETITIONER: THALAPPILLY TALUK PRIMARY COOPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD. WADAKKANCHERY, THRISSUR -680 582. REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY MR.VADUKOOT DEVASSY PAUL. BY ADVS. ANIL D. NAIR TELMA RAJU EDATHARA VINEETA KRISHNAN P.K.BIJU MOHAMMED SAVAD K. RESPONDENTS: 1 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1), THRISSUR-680 001. 2 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), THRISSUR-680 001. ADV. JOSE JOSEPH (SC) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26.08.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C) NO. 27582 OF 2022 2 JUDGMENT The petitioner has approached this Court apprehending recovery proceedings to recover amounts due under Ext.P1 order of assessment. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner has filed a petition for rectification before the assessing authority – the 2nd respondent and pending consideration of the same, recovery proceedings may be kept in abeyance. 2. Heard the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Department. 3. Having regard to the limited nature of relief sought for in the writ petition, this writ petition is disposed of, directing the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P2 application filed for rectification in accordance with law and after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. Till such time as orders are passed on Ext.P2, any proceedings for recovery of

WP(C) NO. 27582 OF 2022 3 amounts due under Ext.P1 assessment order shall be kept in abeyance. Sd/- GOPINATH P. JUDGE DK

WP(C) NO. 27582 OF 2022 4 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 27582/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 07.12.2019 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR RECTIFICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 29.12.2021 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →