THE KODUR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD, F 1523 V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/7985/2020

AI Insights

The case involves the Kodur Service Co-operative Bank Ltd, which challenged the assessment and appellate orders for the financial years 2008-09, 2009-10, and 2014-15. The bank had initially filed appeals against the assessment orders, which were dismissed. Following this, the bank was served with a demand for payment of the assessed amounts. The main legal contention raised was the premature initiation of recovery actions before the expiry of the appeal period. The petitioner also referenced a prior Full Bench decision affecting similar entities, which questioned the demand for even a partial payment of assessed taxes. The court's decision focused on procedural compliance regarding the filing of stay petitions against the recovery actions.

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 769497 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 13-03-2020
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM
• Assessee Lawyers: O D SIVADAS
• Keywords: Appeal; Assessment Order; Primary Agricultural Credit Society; Recovery proceedings; Stay Petition
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN FRIDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 23RD PHALGUNA, 1941 WP(C).No.7985 OF 2020(W) PETITIONER: THE KODUR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD F 1523, KODUR P.O. MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. BY ADV. SRI.O.D.SIVADAS RESPONDENTS: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD (4) TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT 676 001. 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS), AYAKAR BHAVAN, KOZHIKODE 673 001. 3 THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KAKKANAD, KOCHI 682 037. R1-3 BY SC CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.03.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.7985 OF 2020 2 JUDGMENT Dated this the 13th day of March 2020 The petitioner, a Primary Agricultural Credit Society had preferred appeals against Exhibits P1 to P3-assessment orders for the years 2008-09, 2009-10 and 2014-15. The appeals were dismissed by Exhibit P7-a common order. 2. The petitioner has challenged the assessment as well as the appellate orders by preferring Exhibits P8 to P10-second appeals. 3. In the meanwhile, the petitioner has been served with Exhibit P11-proceeding, demanding payment of the entire amount assessed. 4. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that, Exhibit P7- appellate order is dated 29-01-2020, which is served on the petitioner only on 20-02-2020, and the appeals have been preferred immediately thereafter. WP(C).No.7985 OF 2020 3 5. It is submitted that, it is unreasonable and arbitrary for the first respondent to have initiated recovery action before expiry of appeal period. 6. It is further contended that, a Division Bench of this Court had in Writ Appeal No. 1536/2019, considered a demand for remittance of 20% of the tax assessed regard to Primary Agricultural Credit Societies with reference to the Full Bench decision in Mavilayi Service Co- operative Bank Ltd. vs. The commissioner of Income Tax,[2019(2) KHC 2871], and the insistence for payment of even 20% of the demand to be bad. 7. Heard the learned Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department also, who points out that, the petitioners have not even preferred stay petitions along with the appeals. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to prefer the stay petitions immediately . WP(C).No.7985 OF 2020 4 9. On consideration of the rival submissions, I am inclined to dispose of the writ petition, directing the petitioner to prefer stay petitions with respect to Exhibits P8 to P10- appeals within a period of two weeks, and in the event of such stay petitions being filed , the 3rd respondent to consider and pass orders on the stay petitions within a period of two months thereafter. 10. Till such time, as orders are passed on the stay petitions, provided that the petitions are filed, recovery proceedings pursuant to Exhibits P1-P3 shall be deferred and there shall not be any insistence to pay the demand as raised in Exhibit P11. Sd/- V.G.ARUN JUDGE SSK/13/3 WP(C).No.7985 OF 2020 5 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 23.02.2016 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE PERIOD 2008-09. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 24.12.2016 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE PERIOD 2009-10. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 24.12.2016 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE PERIOD 2014-15. EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 14/07/2016 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE PERIOD 2008-09. EXHIBIT P5 COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 27/01/2017 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE PERIOD 2009-10. EXHIBIT P6 COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 27/01/2017 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE PERIOD 2014-15. EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 29.01.2020 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P8 COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 03.02.2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PERIOD 2008-09. EXHIBIT P9 COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 03.02.2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PERIOD 2009-10. EXHIBIT P10 COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 03.02.2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PERIOD 2014-15. EXHIBIT P11 THE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 10.03.2020 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:NIL SSK //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE "