VYAVASAYA SEVA SAHAKARA BANK V. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER AND ANR

WP/200841/2017

AI Insights

The case involves two writ petitions filed by Vyavasaya Seva Sahakara Bank Niyamitha, challenging the orders of the Appellate Authority which upheld the demands made by the Income Tax Department for the assessment year 2012-13. The banks claimed exemption under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act but failed to appear before the Appellate Authority or provide necessary documents to substantiate their claim. The High Court, after hearing both parties, decided to give the petitioners another opportunity to present their case, conditional upon the deposit of the demanded amounts.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 727814 (HC-KARNATAKA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 01-04-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, Constitution of India
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: M TIRUMALESH
• Assessee Lawyers: SANJEEVKUMAR PATIL
• Keywords: Assessment Year 2012-13; Exparte order; Income tax exemption; Writ of Certiorari; Writ of Mandamus
• Section: 80P(2)(a)(i)

Judgement Text

" - 1 - NC: 2024:KHC-K:2755 WP No. 200841 of 2017 C/W WP No. 200842 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA WRIT PETITION NO. 200841 OF 2017 (T-IT) C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 200842 OF 2017 (T-IT) IN W.P 200841 OF 2017 BETWEEN: VYAVASAYA SEVA SAHAKARA BANK NIYAMITHA NO.5 TIDIGOL, TQ: SIDHANUR, DIST: RAICHUR-584201. PA-AAALV0086B, REP. BY ITS CEO SRI NEELAKANTH S/O AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS …PETITIONER (BY SRI SANJEEVKUMAR C. PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEAL), AYAKARA BHAVAN, SEDAM ROAD, KALABRUAGI 2. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX OFFICE, WARD NO.2, RAICHUR-584201. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI M. TIRUMALESH, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by RENUKA Location: High Court Of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC-K:2755 WP No. 200841 of 2017 C/W WP No. 200842 of 2017 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR A DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 24.10.2016, IN ITA NO. 30/CIT(A)/KBG/2015-16, PASSED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE INCOME TAX ACT READ WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT VIDE ANNEXURES-A AND PLEASED TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR A DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF WRIT OF MANDAMUS, CONSIDERING THE ORDER DATED 24.10.2016, IN ITA NO. 30/CIT (A)KBG/2015-16, PASSED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT READ WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT VIDE ANNEXURES-A ON MERITS ETC. IN W P NO.200842 OF 2017 BETWEEN: M/S VYAVASAYA SEVA SAHAKARA BANK NIYAMITHA, NO.5 GUDADUR, TQ: SIDHANUR, DIST: RAICHUR-584201. REP. BY ITS CEO SRI SHIVAPUTRAPPA S/O SIDDANAGOUNDA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS. …PETITIONER (BY SRI SANJEEVKUMAR C. PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEAL), AYAKARA BHAVAN, SEDAM ROAD, KALABRUAGI-585101. 2. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX OFFICE, WARD NO.2, RAICHUR-584101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI M. TIRUMALESH, ADVOCATE) - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC-K:2755 WP No. 200841 of 2017 C/W WP No. 200842 of 2017 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE OF CERTIORARI OR A DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 24.10.2016 BEARING NO. ITA NO 32/CIT(A)/KBG/2015-16 PASSED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT READ WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE INCOME TAX ACT VIDE ANNEXURE-A ETC. THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER Heard the learned counsel Sri Sanjeevkumar C. Patil for the petitioners and learned counsel Sri M.Tirumalesh for the respondents. 2. The writ petitions are filed with the following prayers: In W.P.No.200841/2017 “i) Issue a writ of certiorari or a direction in the nature of writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 24.10.2016, in ITA No.30/CIT(A)/KBG/2015-16, passed by the first respondent under the provisions of the Income Tax Act read with the provisions of the act vide Annexures-A in the interest of justice. ii) To issue a writ of mandamus or a direction in the nature of writ of mandamus, considering the - 4 - NC: 2024:KHC-K:2755 WP No. 200841 of 2017 C/W WP No. 200842 of 2017 order dated 24.10.2016, in ITA No.30/CIT (A)KBG/2015-16, passed by the first respondent under the provisions of the act read with the provisions of the act vide Annexures-A on merits, in the interest of justice and equity. iii) To issue such other writ or writs or directions in the nature of a writ as this Court may deem it fit to grant in the facts and circumstances of the petitioner’s case.” In W.P.No.200842/2017 i) Issue a writ of certiorari or a direction in the nature of writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 24.10.2016 bearing ITA No.32/CIT(A)/KBG/2015-16 passed by the first respondent under the provisions of the Income Tax Act read with the provisions of the Income Tax Act vide Annexure-A in the interest of justice. ii) To issue a writ of mandamus of a direction in the nature of writ of mandamus, considering the order dated 24.10.2016 passed by the first respondent under the provisions of Income Tax Act read with the provision of the Act vide Annexures-A on merits, in the interest of justice and equity. iii) To issue such other writ or writs or directions in the nature of a writ as this Court may - 5 - NC: 2024:KHC-K:2755 WP No. 200841 of 2017 C/W WP No. 200842 of 2017 deem it fit to grant in the facts and circumstances of the petitioner’s case.” 3. The petitioners are the Cooperative Banks. According to the petitioners, they are entitled for exemption under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2012-13. The petitioners – Banks did not appear before the Appellate Authority nor produced any documents to substantiate that they are entitled for such exemption. Therefore, the Appellate Authority passed an order upholding the order of the Assessment Officer and upheld the demand. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners – Banks are challenging the orders of the Appellate Authority before this Court marked at Annexure-A in both the cases on the ground that on the day when the hearing was fixed, the petitioners have failed to appear nor produced any documents and therefore, the order of the Appellate Authority is per se exparte order and therefore, sought for allowing the writ - 6 - NC: 2024:KHC-K:2755 WP No. 200841 of 2017 C/W WP No. 200842 of 2017 petitions and remit the matter to the Appellate Authority for fresh disposal in accordance with law after affording an opportunity to the petitioners. 5. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondents oppose the writ grounds by contending that the writ petitioners have failed to appear before the Appellate Authority nor produced any documents to substantiate exemption as referred to supra and in the absence of any material documents, the Appellate Authority after verifying the records by the Assessing Officer that have been placed, has confirmed the demand of Rs.20,47,120/- and Rs.21,95,390/- for the assessment year 2012-13 in respect of the writ petitioners respectively by dismissing the appeals. Therefore, sought for dismissal of the writ petitions. 6. Having heard the parties, this Court perused the material on record meticulously. 7. On such perusal of the material on record, it is seen that the prime contention of the petitioners is that for - 7 - NC: 2024:KHC-K:2755 WP No. 200841 of 2017 C/W WP No. 200842 of 2017 the earlier assessment year, the petitioners were granted exemption as referred to supra and for the assessment year 2012-13, the Assessing Officer did not grant such a relief to the petitioners, which was challenged before the Appellate Authority and on the day which was fixed for hearing, the petitioners have failed to appear before the Appellate Authority nor produced any documents. Therefore, the impugned orders came to be passed. 8. It is not the case of the petitioners that no opportunity was granted. On the contrary, the opportunity that was granted to the petitioners was not utilized by the petitioners is the case on hand. 9. Nevertheless, since the petitioners submit that they may be provided one more opportunity to substantiate that the petitioners – Banks are entitled for exemption as aforesaid, it is just and proper to afford one more opportunity to the petitioners provided the petitioners to deposit the entire demand amount within a period of 15 days here from. - 8 - NC: 2024:KHC-K:2755 WP No. 200841 of 2017 C/W WP No. 200842 of 2017 10. If the petitioners deposit the entire demand amount within one month from today and produce the receipt thereof, the Appellate Authority shall revive the appeals and afford an opportunity for the petitioners and then dispose of the appeals in accordance with law. In view of the above discussion, the writ petitions stand disposed of. Sd/- JUDGE SRT CT-SI LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 58 "