Wp(C)/9299/2015 Of Vengara Service Co-Operative Rural Bank Ltd v. The Income Tax Officer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF MARCH 2015/3RD CHAITHRA, 1937 WP(C).No. 9299 of 2015 (J) --------------------------- PETITIONER : --------------------- VENGARA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE RURAL BANK LTD. NO.F-1186, VENGARA P.O., MALAPPURAM REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. BY ADV. SRI.O.D.SIVADAS RESPONDENT(S) : ---------------------------- 1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD NO.3, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-676 505. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MANANCHIRA, KOZHIKODE-673 001. AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MANANCHIRA, KOZHIKODE-673 001. R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI. K.M.V. PANDALAI, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24-03-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn WP(C).No. 9299 of 2015 (J) ------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS :------------------------------------------ EXT. P1 : COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR 2009-10. EXT. P2 : COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR 2010-11. EXT. P3 : COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR 2011-12. EXT. P4 : COPY OF THE APPEAL FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. EXT. P5 : COPY OF THE APPEAL FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. EXT. P6 : COPY OF THE APPEAL FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12. EXT. P7 : COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. EXT. P8 : COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. EXT. P9 : COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12. EXT. P10 : COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DTD.12.3.2015. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL --------------------------------------------------------- //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Mn A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J. =========================================== W.P.(C). No. 9299 of 2015 ===================================================== Dated this the 24[th] day of March, 2015 JUDGMENT Against Exts.P1 to P3 assessment orders under the IncomeTax Act, the petitioner has preferred Exts.P4 to P6 appeals andExts.P7 to P9 stay petitions before the 2[nd] respondent. The 2[nd]respondent thereafter considered the stay petitions and passedExt.P10 order, rejecting the stay petitions by relying on certaindecisions. On a perusal of Ext.P10 order, however, it is seen thatthere is no discussion with regard to the issues raised by thepetitioner in the appeals filed before the 2[nd] respondent, or aconsideration of the financial hardship that is faced by thepetitioner. It is also pointed out that there was no notice issued tothe petitioner prior to passing of Ext.P10 order and the petitionerwas also not heard in the matter. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner andthe learned Standing counsel for the respondents. 3. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of thecase as also the submissions made across the bar, I find that inExt.P10 order of the 2[nd] respondent, there is no consideration of themerits of the petitioner's case or the issue of financial hardship that 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner andthe learned Standing counsel for the respondents. 3. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of thecase as also the submissions made across the bar, I find that inExt.P10 order of the 2[nd] respondent, there is no consideration of themerits of the petitioner's case or the issue of financial hardship that was raised by the petitioner. It is also evident that the petitionerwas not put on notice before considering the matter and he wasalso not afforded a personal hearing. In that view of the matter,Ext.P10 order is vitiated by a non-compliance with the principle ofnatural justice. Thus, I quash Exts.P10 and direct the 2[nd]respondent to reconsider the stay petitions filed by the petitionerafter providing him with an opportunity of being heard. The 2[nd]respondent shall pass fresh orders on the stay petitions within aperiod of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of thisjudgment. The petitioner shall appear before the 2[nd] respondent at11 am on 10.04.2015 for a hearing before the 2[nd] respondent. Imake it clear that, till orders are passed as directed, by the 2[nd]respondent and communicated to the petitioner, recovery steps forrecovery of the amounts confirmed against the petitioner by theorders impugned in the appeals, shall be kept in abeyance. The writ petition disposed as above. Sd/-A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE W.P.(C). No. 9299 of 2015 -3-