THAIKKAD SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD V. INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/16747/2017

AI Insights

The case involves the Thaikkad Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., which challenged an assessment order under the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2008-09. The bank had filed an appeal against this order and simultaneously requested a stay on the recovery of the assessed amounts. The Income Tax Officer (ITO) granted a conditional stay, requiring the payment of 15% of the assessed amount. The bank contested this condition in the High Court, arguing that the issue was already covered in its favor by a previous Division Bench judgment of the High Court, although the Department had appealed this judgment to the Supreme Court. The High Court of Kerala, considering the pending appeal in the Supreme Court, quashed the ITO's order and directed the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to expedite the hearing of the bank's appeal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 699171 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 23-05-2017
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: W.P.(C) NO.14545 OF 2017 (P)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: JOSE JOSEPH
• Assessee Lawyers: ANIL NAIR; R; P PAUL; MEKHALA BENNY; JOSEPH GOPURAN
• Keywords: Appeal; Assessment Order; Income Tax; Stay of recovery
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF MAY 2017/2ND JYAISHTA, 1939 WP(C).No. 16747 of 2017 (P) ---------------------------- PETITIONER: ---------- THAIKKAD SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD, NO.8/33, BRAHMAKULAM P.O., THAIKKAD, THRISSUR-680104 REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, MR.C.K.SADANANDAN BY ADVS.SRI.ANIL D. NAIR SRI.R.SREEJITH SRI.P.JINISH PAUL KUM.MEKHALA M.BENNY SRI.JOSEPH GOPURAN RESPONDENT: ----------- INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, GURUVAYOOR, THRISSUR-680101 BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23-05-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.V. WP(C).No. 16747 of 2017 (P) ---------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ----------------------- EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 19.12.2016 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM FILED BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BEFORE THE RESPONDENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.AABAT7278H/ITO/WARD- 2/GVR/16-17 DATED 30.03.2017 EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF OFFICE MEMORANDUM (F.NO.404/72/93-ITCC) DATED 29.2.2016 EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 25.4.2017 IN W.P.(C) NO.14545 OF 2017 (P) RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS NIL ----------------------- /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE K.V. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J. ............................................................. W.P.(C).No.16747 of 2017 ............................................................. Dated this the 23nd day of May, 2017 J U D G M E N T Against Ext.P1 order of assessment under the Income Tax Act, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P2 appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). During the pendency of the said appeal, the petitioner also moved the respondent Income Tax Officer for a stay of recovery of the amounts confirmed against him by Ext.P1 assessment order. By Ext.P4 order, the respondent directed the petitioner to pay 15% of the amounts confirmed against him, by Ext.P1 assessment order, as a condition for the stay of recovery of the balance amounts during the pendency of the appeal. In the writ petition, the petitioner impugns Ext.P4 order, on the ground that, the issue involved in the appeal stands covered in favour of the petitioner by a Division Bench judgment of this Court. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and W.P.(C).No.16747 of 2017 2 also the learned Standing counsel for the Income Tax Authority. The learned Standing counsel would submit on instructions that against the Division Bench judgment of this Court, the Department has taken up the matter in appeal before the Supreme Court and the SLP is pending. Taking note of the said submission, I dispose the writ petition with the following directions: i. Ext.P4 order is quashed. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) shall dispose Ext. P2 appeal after hearing the petitioner. ii. I make it clear that till such time as orders are passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) on Ext.P2 appeal and the orders so passed communicated to the petitioner, recovery steps for recovery of amounts confirmed against the petitioner by Ext.P1 assessment order shall be kept in abeyance. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petition along with a copy of the judgment before the respondent and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for further action. Sd/- A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE mns/23.05.17 W.P.(C).No.16747 of 2017 3 "