Wa/738/2024 Of The Paravur Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd v. The Income Tax Officer

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 3 DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 13TH JYAISHTA, 1946 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN WP(C) NO.17762 OF 2024OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA APPELLANT/PETITIONER THE PARAVUR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.1801REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PARAVUR P.O, KOLLAMDISTRICT, PIN - 691301 BY ADVS.ARJUN RAGHAVANT.R.HARIKUMARPOOJA PANKAJ RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT 1THE INCOME TAX OFFICERWARD-2, OFFICE OF THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, AAYAKARBHAVAN, KARBALA JUNCTION, KOLLAM., PIN - 691350WARD-2, OFFICE OF THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, AAYAKARBHAVAN, KARBALA JUNCTION, KOLLAM., PIN - 691350 2THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, NORTH BLOCK, DELHI., PIN - 110001NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, NORTH BLOCK, DELHI., PIN - 110001 3THE REGISTRAR, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNALCOCHIN BENCH, KENDRIYA BHAVAN, BLOCK NO.C1 & C2, 1ST FLOOR, KAKKANAD, COCHIN., PIN - 682030COCHIN BENCH, KENDRIYA BHAVAN, BLOCK NO.C1 & C2, 1ST FLOOR, KAKKANAD, COCHIN., PIN - 682030 OTHER PRESENT: SC-P.G.JAYASHANKAR. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON03.06.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THEFOLLOWING: J U D G M E N T============ Dr. A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar, J. This appeal has been preferred by the appellant-Co-operative Bank aggrieved by the judgment dated23.05.2024 of a learned Single Judge in W.P(C)No.17762 of2024. 2. The brief facts necessary for disposal of this writappeal are as follows: The appellant herein had approached the writ courtagainst an order of the First Appellate Authority under theIncome Tax Act, against which order they had preferred Ext.P3appeal, Ext.P4 stay petition and Ext.P5 delay condonationapplication before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. 3. The limited prayer in the writ petition was for a direction to the Appellate Tribunal to consider and pass orders on Ext.P5 delay condonation application and to stay therecovery proceedings for recovery of amounts confirmedagainst the appellant by the first appellate order, till such timeas the Tribunal had an occassion to consider and pass orderson the dealy condonation applicaton. 4. The learned Single Judge, proceeding on theassumption that the Appellate Tribunal did not have a power tocondone the delay in question, thought it appropriate todismiss the writ petition. It is against the said judgment of thelearned Single Judge that the appellant is before us in thisappeal. 5. We have heard Sri.Arjun Raghavan, the learnedcounsel for the appellant and Sri.P.G.Jayashankar, the learnedStanding Counsel for the Income Tax Department. 6. It is the submission of Sri.Arjun Raghavan, thelearned counsel for the appellant that, as per the provisions ofthe statute, the Appellate Tribunal has the power to condone the delay in question and it is a discretionary power that has tobe exercised based on the provisions of the statute and byconsidering the explanation of the assessee for the delay.Taking note of the said submission and finding that thestatutory provisions empower the Tribunal to condone thedelay in question, we deem it appropriate to allow the writappeal, by setting aside the impugned judgment of the learnedSingle Judge, and with the following directions: 6. It is the submission of Sri.Arjun Raghavan, thelearned counsel for the appellant that, as per the provisions ofthe statute, the Appellate Tribunal has the power to condone the delay in question and it is a discretionary power that has tobe exercised based on the provisions of the statute and byconsidering the explanation of the assessee for the delay.Taking note of the said submission and finding that thestatutory provisions empower the Tribunal to condone thedelay in question, we deem it appropriate to allow the writappeal, by setting aside the impugned judgment of the learnedSingle Judge, and with the following directions: The Appellate Tribunal, before which Ext.P3 appeal,Ext.P4 stay petition and Ext.P5 delay condondationapplication preferred by the appellant are pending, shallconsider and pass orders on Ext.P5 delay condonationapplication within a period of two months from the date ofreceipt of a copy of this judgment. The recovery steps forrecovery of the amounts confirmed against the petitioner bythe orders of the first appellate authority shall be kept inabeyance till such time as orders are passed by the AppellateTribunal on the delay condonation application as directed andthe order communicated to the appellant. W.A.No.738 of 2024 5 The writ appeal is disposed as above. Sd/- DR. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE Sd/- SYAM KUMAR V.M. JUDGE smm