M/S CHAZHOOR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD V. INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/41592/2017

AI Insights

The case involves M/s Chazhoor Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., the petitioner, who contested several orders related to the assessment and penalties imposed for the assessment year 2009-10 under various sections of the Income Tax Act. The petitioner had their assessment completed under Section 144 and faced penalties under Sections 271(1)(c), 271B, and 271F. The petitioner appealed against these orders, citing a favorable precedent in a similar case (Chirakkal Service Co-operative Bank Ltd v. Commissioner of Income Tax). The core issue was the realization of the assessed amounts from the petitioner's bank account before the appeals could be adjudicated, prompting the petitioner to seek an expedited hearing of their appeals.

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 755213 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 13-04-2018
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Chirakkal Service Co-operative Bank Ltd v. Commissioner of Income Tax [2016 (2) KLT 535]
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM; P C SASIDHARAN
• Assessee Lawyers: S RAJ; C T SUJA
• Keywords: Appeal; Assessment Order; Income Tax; Penalty; Stay Petition
• Section: 147; 144; 271(1)(c); 271B; 271F; 226(3)

Judgement Text

" IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR FRIDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF APRIL 2018 / 23RD CHAITHRA, 1940 WP(C).No. 41592 of 2017 ------------------------ PETITIONER: ---------- M/S CHAZHOOR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., CHAZHOOR.P.O, THRISSUR-680571, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY K.B. VIJAYAN. BY ADVS.SRI.S.ARUN RAJ SMT.C.T.SUJA RESPONDENT(S): ------------- 1. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), THRISSUR-680001. 2. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, SAKTHAN THAMPURAN NAGAR, THRISSUR-680001. 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, SAKTHAN THAMPURAN NAGAR, THRISSUR-680001. 4. THE MANAGER, THE THRISSUR DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., ANTHIKAD BRANCH, P.O.KANJANI, THRISSUR-680612. 5. THE BRANCH MANAGER, THE THRISSUR DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., PERINGOTTUKARA, THRISSUR-680565. R1 TO R3 BY SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, SC R4 & R5 BY SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13-04-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: mbr/ WP(C).No. 41592 of 2017 (Y) --------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: ---------------------- EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 6.12.2016 PASSED UNDER SECTION 144.R.W.S.147 OF THE ACT FOR THE AY 2009-10. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 19.6.2017 PASSED UNDER SECTION 271 (1)(C)OF THE ACT FOR THE AY 2009-10. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 19.6.2017 PASSED UNDER SECTION 271 B OF THE ACT FOR THE AY 2009-10. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 31.5.2017 PASSED UNDER SECTION 271 F OF THE ACT FOR THE AY 2009-10. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 10.11.2017 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM ALONG WITH DELAY CONDONATION PETITION FILED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT AGAINST EXHIBIT P-1 ORDER FOR THE AY 2009-10. EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM ALONG WITH DELAY CONDONATION PETITION FILE BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT AGAINST EXHIBIT P-2 ORDER FOR THE AY 2009-10. EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM ALONG WITH DELAY CONDONATION PETITION FILE BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT AGAINST EXHIBIT P-3 ORDER FOR THE AY 2009-10. EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM ALONG WITH DELAY CONDONATION PETITION FILE BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT AGAINST EXHIBIT P-4 ORDER FOR THE AY 2009-10. EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT AGAINST EXHIBIT P-1 ORDER FOR THE AY 2009-10. EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT AGAINST EXHIBIT P-2 ORDER FOR THE AY 2009-10. EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT AGAINST EXHIBIT P-3 ORDER FOR THE AY 2009-10. EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT AGAINST EXHIBIT P-4 ORDER FOR THE AY 2009-10. EXHIBIT P14 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 15.11.2017 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. WP(C).No. 41592 of 2017 (Y) --------------------------- EXHIBIT P15 TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF THE ACCOUNT NO:10717038528 MAINTAINED WITH THE 4TH RESPONDENT ANTHIKAD BRANCH. EXHIBIT P16 TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF THE ACCOUNT NO.80009222724 MAINTAINED WITH THE 5TH RESPONDENT PERINGOTTUKARA BRANCH. EXHIBIT P17 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 28.11.2017 SENT TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P18 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 10.11.2017 UNDER SECTION 226(3) OF THE ACT SERVED ON THE 4TH RESPONDENT BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL ---------------------- /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE mbr/ 18.04.2018. P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.41592 of 2017 --------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 13th day of April, 2018 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is an assessee under the Income T ax Act (the Act). The assessment of the petitioner for the year 2009- 10 was completed under Section 144 of the Act in terms of Ext.P1 order. In addition, petitioner was imposed penalty under Sections 271(1)(c), 271B and 271F of the Act. Exts.P2, P3 and P4 are the orders passed in this regard. Aggrieved by Ext.P1 order, the petitioner preferred Ext.P6 appeal and aggrieved by Exts.P2 to P4 orders, the petitioner preferred Exts.P7 to P9 appeals. It is stated by the petitioner that while they were taking steps to move the appellate authority for stay in the aforesaid matters, the entire amounts covered by Exts.P1 to P4 orders have been realized by the competent authority under the Act from the bank account of the petitioner. The petitioner W.P.(c).No.41592 of 2018 : 2 : contends that the issue raised by the petitioner in the appeals is covered in their favour by the decision of this Court in Chirakkal Service Co-operative Bank Ltd v. Commissioner of Income Tax [2016 (2) KLT 535]. The petitioner, therefore, seeks early disposal of the appeals. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 3. The application of the decision relied on by the petitioner is a matter for the Appellate Authority to consider. Be that as it may. Insofar as the entire amount due in terms of the orders impugned in the appeals have already been realised from the petitioner, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the third respondent to dispose of Exts.P6 to P9 appeals out of turn, after affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing. Ordered accordingly. This shall be done within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Sd/- P.B.SURESH KUMAR JUDGE rsr "