PALODE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD V. INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/20958/2021

AI Insights

The case involves the Palode Co-operative Agricultural Development Bank Ltd., which sought relief from the High Court regarding the delay in the disposal of their appeal against an assessment order for the year 2018-19. The assessment order was passed by the Income Tax Officer, and the appeal was initially filed via email due to technical glitches in the e-filing system, followed by a subsequent e-filing once the system was operational. The main legal issue in the appeal pertains to the disallowance of a deduction claim under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, which the petitioner argued was contrary to a precedent set by the Kerala High Court in a similar case.

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 686711 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 08-10-2021
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank and Others v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Calicut and Others [2021 (1) KLT 485]
• Laws Referred To: Section 80P
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM
• Assessee Lawyers: ANIL NAIR; TELMA RAJU; SANGEETH JACOB; CHRISTINA PAUL; ARAVIND SREEKUMAR
• Keywords: Assessment Order; Deduction claim; Disallowance; E-filing; Time bound appeal disposal
• Section: 80P

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS FRIDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 16TH ASWINA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 20958 OF 2021 PETITIONER: PALODE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD KUSAVOOR, KARIMANCODE, PALODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 562, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY BY ADVS. ANIL D. NAIR TELMA RAJU SANGEETH JOSEPH JACOB CHRISTINA ANNA PAUL ARAVIND SREEKUMAR RESPONDENTS: 1 INCOME TAX OFFICER, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NATIONAL E- ASSESSMENT CENTRE-NEAC, ROOM NO 402, 2ND FLOOR, E-RAMP, NEAR GATE NO 10, JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM, NEW DELHI- 110 003. 2 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) NATIONAL FACELESS APPEALS CENTRE, NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE-NEAC ROOM NO 402, 2ND FLOOR, E-RAMP, NEAR GATE NO 10, JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM, NEW DELHI-110 003. OTHER PRESENT: ADV. CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM - SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.10.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 20958 OF 2021 2 BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J ................................................ W.P.(C) NO. 20958 OF 2021 …........................................ Dated this the 8th day of october, 2021 JUDGMENT Petitioner seeks a relief of disposal of Ext.P2 appeal in a time bound manner. 2. An order of assessment was passed against the petitioner on 31-5-2021 for the assessment year 2018-19. Petitioner claims to have preferred an appeal through Ext.P2 before the 2nd respondent. During the course of hearing, a dispute arose as to whether the petitioner had carried out an e-mail filing of the appeal or whether it was an WP(C) NO. 20958 OF 2021 3 e-filing of the appeal which was done by the petitioner. The records produced before this Court shows that petitioner had, initially, within the time limit for filing an appeal, preferred the appeal through e-mail, as the technical glitches of the electronic portal of the Income Tax Department prevented the petitioner from uploading the appeal through e-filing method. Subsequently when the glitches where rectified, petitioner filed the appeal through the e-filing method. 3. Petitioner has produced Ext.P2 acknowledgment receipt of e-filing dated 23-09-2021. In view of the acknowledgment receipt Ext.P2 dated 23/9/2021, it is clear that petitioner has e-filed the appeal. The stay petition filed by the petitioner is also pending consideration. WP(C) NO. 20958 OF 2021 4 4. A perusal of the memorandum of appeal reveals that the main issue involved in the appeal relates to the disallowance of the claim for deduction under Section 80P. According to the petitioner the said disallowance was contrary to the judgment in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank and Others v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Calicut and Others [2021 (1) KLT 485]. 5. Since in similar matters this Court has directed the appeal itself to be considered and disposed of, it is essential that the petitioner also be treated alike. 6. Accordingly this writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider and dispose of Ext.P2 appeal (as acknowledged by e-filing WP(C) NO. 20958 OF 2021 5 acknowledgement dated 23-09-2021) as expeditiously as possible. Till such orders are passed, all coercive proceedings against petitioner pursuant to Ext.P1 assessment order shall be kept in abeyance. Sd/- BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE AJM WP(C) NO. 20958 OF 2021 6 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 20958/2021 PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS: Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2018-19 DATED 31.5.2021 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 5.6.2021. Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 5.6.2021. Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 13.7.2021 RESPONDENT’S EXHIBITS: NIL AJM //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE "