Allowed

The Kadannamanna Service Co-Operative Bank Limited NO.10561 v. the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)

Kerala HC1 Jul 2019WA/1530/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ appeals seeking modification of Single Judge order. Court observed identical issues across appeals. Allowed appeals, set aside Single Judge order, and directed CIT(A) to dispose of statutory appeals citing Full Bench dictum and keep recovery in abeyance.

What did the court decide?

Writ appeals allowed; impugned judgment set aside; direction to dispose of statutory appeals and keep recovery in abeyance.

The Kadannamanna Service Co-Operative Bank Limited NO.10561 Vs the… — Income Tax | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM

¶4

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. NARAYANA PISHARADI

¶6

MONDAY, THE 01ST DAY OF JULY 2019 / 10TH ASHADHA, 1941

¶7

WA.No.1530 of 2019

¶8

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 12910/2019 of HIGHCOURT DTD.31.5.2019

¶9

APPELLANT/PETITIONER:

¶10

THE KADANNAMANNA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED NO.10561, KADANNAMANNA P.O, MANAKADA VIA, MALAPPURAM-679324, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.O.D.SIVADAS

¶12

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

¶13

1 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AYAKAR BHAVAN, KOZHIKODE-673001.

¶14

2 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD (4), TIRUR-676001.

¶15

OTHER PRESENT:

¶16

SC-SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM

¶17

THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.07.2019, ALONG WITH W.A.NO.1529/19 & CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

¶19

WA.1530/19

¶20

C.K. ABDUL REHIM, J. &

¶21

R. NARAYANA PISHARADI , J.

¶22

------------------------------------------------W.A.Nos.1529, 1530, 1535 & 1536 of 2019

¶23

Dated this the 1^st day of July, 2019

¶24

JUDGMENT

¶25

Abdul Rehim, J.

¶26

1.Since the issue involved in all these writ appeals are identical, they were considered together and disposed of through this common judgment.

¶27

2.Challenge raised in the writ petitions are against the interim order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), insisting upon payment of 20% of the disputed tax amount, pending disposal of the appeals. The learned single Judge while disposing the writ petitions, had reduced the condition by limiting the payment to an amount of 10%, till the disposal

¶28

of the appeals. It is challenging those judgments, these appeals are filed.

¶29

Learned counsel for the appellants contended that, the question regarding liability of the appellant banks to pay the

¶30

WA.1530/19

¶31

¶32

income tax assessed, is a matter which was decided by a Full Bench of this Court in the judgment in ITA.Nos.97/16 and connected cases, dated 19.3.2019 { The Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Calicut [2019 (2) KHC 287]}. In view of the dictum laid in the said judgment, it is contended that the appellate authority can only remand the matter to the assessing authority for conducting a fresh enquiry with respect to the nature of the activities of the banks in question. Hence it is contended that, the insistence for making payment of any portion of the amount under demand, pending disposal of the appeal, may cause hardships and prejudices to the banks concerned.

¶33

Sri.Christopher Abraham, learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent, on the other hand contended that, the part payment insisted for granting stay is a matter which comes within the discretion of the appellate authority and this Court may not be justified in interfering with exercise of such discretion.

¶34

WA.1530/19

¶35

¶36

However, taking note of the peculiar aspect involved touching the merits in the appeals based on the Full Bench decision mentioned above, we are of the opinion that the insistence for payment of a portion, as a condition for granting stay, need not be made in the cases at hand. Therefore the impugned judgments need to be modified.

¶37

Hence, the writ appeals are hereby allowed. The impugned judgment of the single Judge are hereby set aside. The respective writ petitions are allowed to the extent of directing the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to consider and dispose of the statutory appeals filed by the appellants herein, at the earliest, taking note of the Full Bench decision cited above and to keep in abeyance recovery and collection of the tax assessed, pending disposal of such appeals.

Sd/-

C.K.ABDUL REHIM

JUDGE

Sd/-

R. NARAYANA PISHARADI

¶43

JUDGE

¶44

kkb.

The Kadannamanna Service Co-Operative Bank Limited NO.10561 v. the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Kadannamanna Service Co-Operative Bank Limited NO.10561 v. the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sathyavathy, Vs State of Kerala

State of Kerala Vs Sathyavathy

Supreme Industries Ltd., Vs State of Kerala

The Chief Engineer Vs the Assistant COMMISSIONER-1(ASSESSMENT)

A.P.Vijayan Vs the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax State Goods and Service Tax Department

A.P.Vijayan Vs the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax