KERALAL LIVESTOCK DEVELOPMENT BOARD LTD V. TEH ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP(C)/24788/2018

AI Insights

The Kerala Livestock Development Board Ltd, a public sector undertaking managed by the Government of Kerala, filed a writ petition challenging the requirement to deposit 20% of disputed tax to have their appeal heard regarding an assessment order for the year 2015-2016. The petitioner argued that similar issues had been previously resolved in their favor, as evidenced by an Appellate Tribunal order (Ext.P9) stating they were not exigible to tax. The court, considering the petitioner's status as a government agency and the precedent set by the Appellate Tribunal, ruled that the pre-condition of tax deposit for appeal should be waived and directed the Appellate Authority to expedite the appeal process without this requirement.

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 697543 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 24-07-2018
• Assessment Year: misc
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: K M V PANDALAI; CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM
• Assessee Lawyers: SUMATHY DANDAPANI; MILLU DANDAPANI
• Keywords: Appeal; Public sector undertaking; Tax Exemption; Stay condition

Judgement Text

" IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU TUESDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF JULY 2018 / 2ND SRAVANA, 1940 WP(C).No. 24788 of 2018 PETITIONER KERALA LIVESTOCK DEVELOPMENT BOARD LTD, GOKULAM,PATTOM,TRIVANDRUM-695004,REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. BY ADVS.SMT.SUMATHY DANDAPANI (SR.) SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI RESPONDENTS: 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1),KOWDIAR,TRIVANDRUM-695003. 2. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, OFFICE OF THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOWDIAR,TRIVANDRUM-695003. 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS), KOWDIAR,TRIVANDRUM-695003. BY SRI. K.M.V PANDALAI, SC BY SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24-07-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 24788 of 2018 (W) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 23.12.2017 EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE OF DEMAND DATED 23.12.2017 EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL WITH ACKNOWLEDGMENT NO.377440611290118 DATED 29.01.2018 FILED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 19.02.2018 FILED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.STAY/CIR-1(1)TVM/17-18 19.04.2018 EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FOR STAY DATED 02.05.2018 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION BEARING REF.NO.T&A/FC.01.04.05/2018 DATED 12.06.2018 ADDRESSED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.C.NO.701/J/STAY/PR.CIT/2/2018-19 DATED 22.06.2018 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF COMMON ORDER ITA NOS.474,484 & 485/COCH/2016 DATED 01.02.2018 EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FOR STAY DATED 13.07.2018 FILED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 21.02.2018 IN WP(C)NO.5083/2016 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF COMMON ORDER NO.ITA NO.25 & 224/TVM/CIT(A),TVM/2015-16 & 2016-17 DATED 16.03.2018 PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS NIL /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE sdr/- 27.7.18 DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J. ============================================== W.P.(C). No.24788 of 2018 ======================================================= Dated this the 24th day of July, 2018 JUDGMENT The petitioner is a public sector undertaking managed by Government of Kerala. It caters to the livestock sector. It is, in other words, State Implementing Agency for the projects formulated by the State and Central Governments. 2. Against Ext.P1 assessment order for 2015-2016, it has filed an appeal. The stay denied, it has taken the issue to the higher echelons. All through, the authorities insisted that the petitioner should deposit 20% of the disputed tax to have the appeal heard. 3. Heard the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 4. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner draws my attention to Ext.P9 order of the Appellate Tribunal for the previous assessment years. The issue is, in fact, -2- W.P.(C). No.24788 of 2018 identical and the finding comprehensive: the petitioner is not exigible to tax. 5. Under these circumstances, given the Ext.P9 findings and given the fact that it is a Government agency, I reckon that the respondent's insistence on the petitioner's complying with the pre-condition may not be necessary. 6. I, therefore, direct the Appellate Authority to consider the petitioner's appeal on merits without insisting on the pre-condition. 7. At this stage, the learned Standing Counsel for the 3rd respondent submitted that this Court may as well fix the time limit for the appeal disposal. Subject to the docket pressure, the Appellate Authority may consider the appeal expeditiously, preferably, in three months. With these observations, I dispose of this Writ Petition. Sd/- DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU JUDGE sd "