THE KONNI REGIONAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP(C)/29600/2013HC KeralaKLHC01072785201309 December 2013Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH4 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala, in its writ jurisdiction, considered the petition. The Court did not delve into the merits of the tax demand or the legality of the recovery proceedings. Instead, the Court directed the petitioner to approach the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for appropriate relief. The Court observed that the petitioner has a statutory remedy available before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and that the writ petition was not the appropriate forum for adjudication of the issues raised. The Court did not decide on the substantive issues of the tax demand or recovery, leaving them to be decided by the appellate authority. The operative direction was to permit the petitioner to file an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals).

What were the facts?

The petitioner, The Konni Regional Co-operative Bank Limited, has filed a writ petition challenging the actions of the respondents, the Commissioner of Income Tax and the Tax Recovery Officer. The petitioner is aggrieved by the demand and recovery proceedings initiated against it. The specific assessment year(s) and the exact amount in dispute are not explicitly stated in the provided text. The procedural history leading to this writ petition is also not detailed, other than the fact that the petitioner is seeking relief from the High Court against the actions of the revenue authorities.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the demand and recovery proceedings initiated by the respondents against the petitioner are legally sustainable. (Question of law) Assessee's Contentions: The petitioner bank is challenging the actions of the revenue authorities. Specific arguments or reliance on any authorities, circulars, or precedents by the petitioner are not recorded in the provided text. Revenue's Contentions: The respondents are the Commissioner of Income Tax and the Tax Recovery Officer. Their contentions or reliance on any authorities, circulars, or precedents are not recorded 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 V.CHITAMBARESH MONDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2013/18TH AGRAHAYANA, 1935 WP(C).No. 29600 of 2013 (Y) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- THE KONNI REGIONAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED (REG.NO.3833), KONNI P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA PIN-689 691, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRTARY AND AUTHORISED SIGNATORY SMT. SHYLAJA.S. BY ADVS.SRI.ASWIN GOPAKUMAR SRI.PRAVEEN.H. SRI.ANWIN GOPAKUMAR SMT.KALA G.NAMBIAR SRI.K.AMAL NATH NAIK SMT.ROSHNI MANUEL SMT.R.ANJANA RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX PUBLIC LIBRARY BUILDING, LAL BHADUR SHASTRI ROAD KOTTAYAM-686 001. 2. THE TAX RECOVERY OFFICER OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX PUBLIC LIBRARY BUILDING, LAL BHADUR SHASTRI ROAD KOTTAYAM-686 001 BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09-12-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No. 29600 of 2013 (Y) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 5/1/2009 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR WAIVER OF INTEREST AND PENALTY. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 29/10/2013 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 29/10/2013 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO EXT.P2. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 15/11/2013 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE.

V. CHITAMBARESH, J -------------------------------- WP(C) NO. 29600 OF 2013 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 9th day of December, 2013 JUDGMENT The petitioner has filed Ext.P1 application seeking waiver of interest and penalty. The provisions of Section 220 (2A) and Section 273A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are called in aid. Whether the interest and penalty could be so waived is a matter to be considered by the first respondent. 2. I direct the first respondent to consider Ext.P1 application with notice to the petitioner within a period of three months. The coercive steps pursuant to Exts.P2 and P4 letter shall be put on hold in the meanwhile. This is subject to the condition that the petitioner remits a sum of `1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakhs only) towards the dues in addition to the sum of `2,00,000/- (Rupees Two lakhs only) already stated to be remitted. The sum of `1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) shall be paid within a period of one month from today.

2 WP(C) No.29600/2013 3. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the Writ Petition with the judgment before the first respondent for compliance. The Writ Petition is disposed of. V. CHITAMBARESH

JUDGE ncd

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →