Click Here For Best Books On Taxation & Law. Upto 60% Off On Select Titles. Free Shipping & Pay On Delivery!
 

Click Here To Subscribe To Our Free Newsletter

This section is now closed. Click here for new judgements

Home › All Judgements › Kerala State Co-op Agricultural And Rural Development Bank Ltd vs. ITO (Kerala High Court)

Kerala State Co-op Agricultural And Rural Development Bank Ltd vs. ITO (Kerala High Court)

Posted on by editor — No Comments ↓
COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS: ,
COUNSEL:
DATE: December 12, 2018 (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: December 24, 2018 (Date of publication)
AY: -
FILE: Click here to download the file in pdf format
CITATION:
S. 220(6) Stay of demand: If the assessee has exercised on time its statutory remedy of filing an appeal and also filed a stay petition, procedural fairness demands that the authorities may wait, before taking further steps, until the appellate authority decides on the stay petition

The petitioner, a Co-Operative Society registered under the Kerala State Societies Act, questioned the Exts.P5 and P6 orders and Ext.P7 demand notice, before the 4th respondent.

The petitioner has also filed a stay petition in the appeal. Ventilating its grievance that the authorities are taking coercive steps before the appellate authority could consider the stay petition, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.

3. I reckon the petitioner has exercised on time its statutory remedy of filing an appeal. It appears that it has also filed a stay petition. Procedural fairness demands that the authorities may wait, before taking further steps, until the appellate authority decides on the stay petition.

Therefore, I dispose of the writ petition directing the respondent authority to defer coercive steps until the 4th respondent considers the stay petition.

I also hope that the 4th respondent will dispose of the stay petition expeditiously.

Sd/- DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU JUDGE

Related Judgements

  1. The Shri Saibaba Sansthan Trust (Shirdi) vs. UOI (Bombay High Court) 

    It would be best if the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) carry out the necessary investigation on the above allegations and if there is truth in it, it would take corrective action on the same. This is particularly because this conduct alleged on the part of the CIT(A)…
  2. Bhupendra Murji Shah vs. DCIT (Bombay High Court) 

    All that we are worried about is the understanding of this Deputy Commissioner of a demand, which is pending or an amount, which is due and payable as tax. If that demand is under dispute and is subject to the appellate proceedings, then, the right of appeal vested in…
  3. Slum Rehabilitation Authority vs. DDIT (Bombay High Court) 

    (i) At the very outset, it must be pointed out that the manner in which the Assessing Officer has disposed of the application for stay by impugned order is in complete breach of the directions of this Court as set … Slum Rehabilitation Authority vs. DDIT (Bombay High…
  4. Piramal Fund Management Pvt. Ltd vs. DCIT (Bombay High Court) 

    We find this conduct on the part of the Assessing Officer to accept a stay application and not immediately give acknowledgement of its receipt is unacceptable. The least that is expected of a civil servant is to be fair and civil. In the absence of the above, his conduct…
  5. ACIT vs. Epson India Pvt. Ltd (Karnataka High Court) 

    It is the unnecessary dogged approach of the Revenue to multiply the litigations in the Constitutional Courts, in turn wasting the precious public hours of time and unholy desire to become a litigant in the Constitutional Courts at Government costs, though there may be absolutely no justification for doing…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*