NEDUMON SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED V. UNION OF INDIA

WP(C)/23772/2017

AI Insights

The case involves the Nedumon Service Co-operative Bank Limited, which challenged a stay order (Ext.P6) issued by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in response to their appeal against an income tax assessment order. The petitioner argued that the stay order did not comply with a previous judgment (Ext.P5) from the same court, which had directed the 2nd respondent to consider the appeal. The court agreed with the petitioner, quashing the stay order and directing the 2nd respondent to resolve the appeal promptly, while also halting any recovery proceedings related to the assessment order until the appeal was decided.

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 722345 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 18-07-2017
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: WPC NO.5729/2017
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: N NAGRESH; O M SHALINA; K M V PANDALAI
• Assessee Lawyers: K SHAJ; RENJIT GEORGE
• Keywords: Appeal; Assessment Order; Income Tax; Stay order
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF JULY 2017/27TH ASHADHA, 1939 WP(C).No. 23772 of 2017 (V) ---------------------------- PETITIONER: ----------------- NEDUMON SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED NEDUMON P.O., NEDUMON, PATHANAMTHITTA-691556 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. BY ADVS.SRI.K.SHAJ SRI.RENJIT GEORGE RESPONDENT(S): -------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY ITS JOINT SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC AFFAIRS, ROOM NO.67 B, NEW DELHI-110 001. 2. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA. 3. INCOME TAX OFFICER OFFICE OF THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5, KOLLAM, KERALA-690 001. R1 BY SRI.N.NAGARESH, ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL BY ADVS. SMT.O.M.SHALINA, CGC R2 & R3 BY SRI.K.M.V.PANDALAI, THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18-07-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sdr/- WP(C).No. 23772 of 2017 (V) ---------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXHIBIT P1: THE TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 5.1.2017 ISSUED BY THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL), PATHANAMTHITA. EXHIBIT P2: THE TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 30.12.2016 PASSED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2014-15. EXHIBIT P3: THE TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 30.12.2016 ISSUED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P4: THE TRUE COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SECOND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P5: THE TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 21.2.2017 IN WPC NO.5729/2017 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT. EXHIBIT P6: THE TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 5.7.2017 OF THE SECOND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P7: THE TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 7.7.2017 ISSUED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS NIL ---------------------------------------- /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE sdr/- A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J. ------------------------------------ W.P. (C) No.23772 of 2017 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 18th day of July, 2017 J U D G M E N T The petitioner has approached this Court challenging Ext.P6 stay order passed by the 2nd respondent in an appeal preferred by the petitioner against an order of assessment under the Income Tax Act. 2. In the writ petition, it is the case of the petitioner that, by Ext.P5 judgment of this Court, the 2nd respondent was directed to consider and pass orders in the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the assessment order, whereas, by Ext.P6 order the 2nd respondent has disposed the stay petition with a direction to the petitioner to remit amounts pending disposal of the appeal. 3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 4. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made across the bar, I find that Ext.P6 order is W.P.(C) No.23772/2017 2 not one that is passed in compliance with the directions in Ext.P5 judgment. I, therefore, quash Ext.P6 order and direct the 2nd respondent to pass orders in the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the assessment order, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. I make it clear that, till such time as orders are passed by the 2nd respondent in the appeal as directed above, recovery proceedings for recovery of the amounts confirmed against the petitioner by the assessment order shall be kept in abeyance. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the 2nd respondent for further action. This writ petition is disposed of as above. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE smp "