Kerala High Court
Kerala State Co-Operative Bank Ltd vs Union Of India on 10 June, 2024
Author: A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar
Bench: A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SYAM KUMAR V.M.
MONDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF JUNE 2024/20TH JYAISHTA, 1946
W.A.NO.765 OF 2024
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 05.04.2024 IN W.P(C).NO.34123 OF 2022
OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT(S)/PETITIONER:
KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD
KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD, PB NO 6515,
COBANK TOWERS, PALAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA,
PIN - 695033.
BY ADV.SRI.B.G.HARINDRANATH (SR.)(K/378/1984)
BY ADV.SRI.AMITH KRISHNAN H.
BY ADV.SRI.GOWRI DEV
BY ADV.SMT.P.DEVIKRISHNA
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENT:
1 UNION OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF FINANCE,
NORTH BLOCK, RAISANA HILL, NEW DELHI-110001.
PIN - 110001
2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS),
AYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695003,
PIN - 695003
BY SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, SC, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
10.06.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
W.A.NO.765 OF 2024 :: 2 ::
JUDGMENT
Dr. A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar, J.
This Writ Appeal is preferred against the judgment dated
05.04.2024 of a learned Single Judge in W.P.(C).No.34123/2022.
2. The brief facts necessary for the disposal of this Writ Appeal
are as follows:
The appellant had preferred the writ petition impugning
Exts.P16 and P18 demand notices issued in pursuance to Ext.P17
assessment order passed under Section 143(3) read with Section
144 B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in respect of the assessment year
2020-21. The assessment order in question was impugned before the
First Appellate Authority, who rejected the appeal. The appellant had,
in the meanwhile, deposited 20% of the assessed tax before the First
Appellate Authority. Consequent to the dismissal of the appeal, the
appellant had to approach the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, which
he did. He approached the writ court because, although the appeal
had been filed before the Appellate Tribunal, the respondent Tax
authorities had issued the impugned demand notices for recovery of
the amounts confirmed against the appellant by the assessment order
in question.
W.A.NO.765 OF 2024 :: 3 ::
3. Before the learned Single Judge, the appellant undertook to
file a stay petition before the Appellate Tribunal within ten days, and
the limited prayer thereafter was for a direction to the Appellate
Tribunal to consider and pass orders on the stay application
expeditiously and to keep in abeyance recovery proceedings that have
been initiated by the respondent in the meanwhile.
4. The learned Single Judge, who considered the matter, while
permitting the appellant to file the stay petition, and directing the
Appellate Tribunal to consider the stay petition expeditiously within a
period of three months, further directed the appellant to remit 30% of
the tax assessed as a condition for staying the recovery of assessed tax
in the meanwhile. It is against this latter direction that the appellant
is before us through this writ appeal.
5. We have heard the learned Senior Counsel Sri. B.G
Hareendranath, duly assisted by Adv. Amith Krishnan H., for the
appellant as also Sri.Christopher Abraham, the learned Standing
Counsel for the respondent Income Tax Department.
6. On a consideration of the rival submissions, we are of the
view that, since the learned Single Judge has relegated the appellant
W.A.NO.765 OF 2024 :: 4 ::
to the alternate remedy before the statutory authority, it was
incumbent upon him to protect the appellant from recovery
proceedings pending disposal of the stay petition by the Appellate
Authority. Accordingly, we modify the impugned judgment of the
learned Single Judge to the limited extent of clarifying that pending
disposal of the stay petition as directed by the learned Single Judge,
the recovery proceedings against the appellant, for recovery of the
amounts referred to in Exts.P16 and P18 demand notices shall be kept
in abeyance unconditionally. Save for this limited modification, the
rest of the directions in the impugned judgment are not interfered
with.
The Writ Appeal is disposed as above.
Sd/-
DR. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
JUDGE
Sd/-
SYAM KUMAR V.M.
JUDGE
prp/10/6/24
W.A.NO.765 OF 2024 :: 5 ::
PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:
ANNEXURE A1 ITAT APPEAL MEMORANDUM DATED 15-04-2024
ANNEXURE A2 TRUE COPY OF RECTIFICATION PETITION DATED
30-01-2024
ANNEXURE A3 REPLY TO SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 8-12-2023.
RESPONDENTS ANNEXUES: NIL.
//TRUE COPY//
P.S. TO JUDGE
