VILAPPIL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK V. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP(C)/10053/2015

AI Insights

The case involves the Vilappil Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., which challenged the assessment order issued by the Income Tax Officer under the Income Tax Act, 1961. The bank filed an appeal and a stay petition against the assessment order, which was not considered before the recovery steps were initiated. The High Court of Kerala intervened to ensure that the stay petition was considered and that recovery actions were paused until a decision was made on the stay petition.

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 699205 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 27-03-2015
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: K M V PANDALAI; T R HARIKUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: BABU NAIR; SMITHA BABU
• Keywords: Assessment Order; Coercive Recovery; Garnishee Order; Income Tax; Stay Petition
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH 2015/6TH CHAITHRA, 1937 WP(C).No. 10053 of 2015 (F) ---------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- VILAPPIL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.2522, HEAD OFFICE, PEYAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY ANIL KUMAR.M, S/O.MADANAPPAN NAIR. BY ADVS.SRI.BABU S. NAIR SMT.SMITHA BABU RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001. 2. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2(4), OFFICE OF THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX RNGE 2, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 003. 3. THE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., HEAD OFFICE, EAST FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER - 695 001. R1 & R2 BY SRI.K.M.V.P ANDALAI, CG R3 BY SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27-03-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: mbr/ WP(C).No. 10053 of 2015 (F) --------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: ------------------------------------ EXHIBIT P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DATED 27.3.2014. EXHIBIT P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 27.3.2014. EXHIBIT P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 28.4.2014. EXHIBIT P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 30.10.2014. EXHIBIT P5 : TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE BRANCH MANAGER OF THE PUTHANCHIRA BRANCH OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT BANK DATED 24.3.2015. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: - NIL -------------------------------------- /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE mbr/ A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J. ................................................. W.P.(C) No. 10053 of 2015 (F) ............................................... Dated this the 27th day of March, 2015 JUDGMENT Against Ext.P1 assessment order passed under the Income Tax Act, 1961, petitioner preferred Ext.P3 appeal and Ext.P4 stay petition before the 1st respondent. It is the case of the petitioner that even before a consideration of the stay petition by the 2nd respondent, recovery steps are sought to be pursued for recovery of the amounts confirmed by Ext.P1 assessment order. 2. I have heard Sri.Babu S.Nair, learned counsel appearing for petitioner and Smt.Sobha Annamma Eappen, learned Government Pleader for the respondents. 3. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made across the Bar, I dispose the writ petition with a direction to the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P4 stay petition, preferred by the petitioner before him, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner. The order to be passed by the 2nd respondent shall contain reasons for the decision arrived at by him. Coercive steps for recovery of the amounts confirmed against W.P.(C) No. 10053 of 2015 (F) 2 the petitioner by Ext.P1 assessment order including garnishee orders in the nature of Ext.P5, shall be kept in abeyance till such time as the 1st respondent passes orders, as directed above, and communicates the same to the petitioner. Sd/- A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE AMV/28/03/ "