THE KIDANGOOR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. V. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), KOTTAYAM

WP(C)/35535/2015

AI Insights

The case involves the Kidangoor Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., which challenged an order from the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that conditioned a stay of tax recovery on the payment of 50% of the assessed tax. The bank had previously appealed against an assessment order and filed a stay petition, which was partially granted by the 1st respondent. The bank contested the condition of the stay, leading to this writ petition. The court's decision was influenced by similar cases where a complete stay against recovery was granted pending the disposal of appeals.

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 755591 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 24-11-2015
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: JOSE JOSEPH
• Assessee Lawyers: O D SIVADAS
• Keywords: Appeal; Assessment Order; Income Tax; Recovery of Tax; Stay Petition
• Section: 80(P)

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2015/3RD AGRAHAYANA, 1937 WP(C).No. 35535 of 2015 (N) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- THE KIDANGOOR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., NO.3431, KIDANGOOR P.O., KIDANGOOR, KOTTAYAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. BY ADV. SRI.O.D.SIVADAS RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), AYAKAR BHAVAN, KOTTAYAM. 686 001. 2. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 5, KOTTAYAM - 686 001. BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24-11-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PJ WP(C).No. 35535 of 2015 (N) ---------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXT.P-1: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 19.11.2014 ISSUED BY THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, KOTTAY AM. EXT.P-2: COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 19.3.2015 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXT.P-3: COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 20.4.2015 FILED BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT EXT.P-4: COPY OF STAY PETITION DATED 20.4.2015 FILED BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT EXT.P-5: COPY OF STAY ORDER DATED 23.8.2014 ISSUED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN I.A.NO.2573 OF 2014 IN ITA NO.198 OF 2014 EXT.P-6: COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 6.11.2015 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS --------------------------------------- NIL. / TRUE COPY / P.S. TO JUDGE PJ A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 35535 of 2015 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 24th day of November 2015 JUDGMENT Against Ext.P2 assessment order under the Income Tax Act, the petitioner had preferred Ext.P3 appeal together with Ext.P4 stay petition, before the 1st respondent. The 1st respondent considered Ext.P4 stay petition and by Ext.P6 order, directed the petitioner to pay 50% of the tax confirmed against him by Ext.P2 order, as a condition for grant of stay of recovery of balance amount, pending disposal of the appeal. In the writ petition, Ext.P6 order is challenged inter alia on the ground that the 1st respondent while passing the said order, did not exercise his discretion validly. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing counsel for the respondents. 3. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made across the Bar, and taking note of the fact that income tax appeals preferred by assessees, against the tribunal order confirming a dis-allowance of the deduction claimed under Section 80 P of the Income Tax Act, are pending before this Court where this Court has granted a complete stay against the recovery of amounts pending disposal of the appeals, I quash Ext.P6 w.p.c.no.35535 of 2015 2 order and direct the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3 appeal filed by the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner. I make it clear that till such time as orders are passed by the 1st respondent as directed, and communicated to the petitioner, recovery steps for recovery of amounts confirmed against the petitioner by Ext.P2 assessment order, shall be kept in abeyance. Sd/- A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE sm/ "