The Ranni Service Co-Operative Ltd. v. Income-tax Officer Ward-3, Thiruvalla / Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Kottayam / The Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Cochin Bench, Kakkanad
[Citation -2020-LL-0824-3]

Citation 2020-LL-0824-3
Appellant Name The Ranni Service Co-Operative Ltd.
Respondent Name Income-tax Officer Ward-3, Thiruvalla / Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Kottayam / The Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Cochin Bench, Kakkanad
Court HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 24/08/2020
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags business income
Bot Summary: OTHER PRESENT: SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC,IT THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24.08.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Writ Appeal No.1126/2020 ::2:: JUDGMENT Dated this the 24th day of August, 2020 Vinod Chandran, J The appellant is challenging the interim order passed by the learned Single Judge, wherein the appellant was directed to pay 20 of the demand made in Exts.P21, P22 and P23. The learned Counsel appearing for the appellant submits that in similar circumstances a Division Bench of this Court issued Annexure A judgment permitting a Co-operative Bank to pay 1 of the demand, for staying the recovery while the first appeal was pending. Annexure Writ Appeal No.1126/2020 ::3:: A was in a circumstance of a Cooperative Bank having been asked to give the details of the depositors, on refusal of which, the Assessing Officer included the deposits made by such undisclosed depositors as undisclosed income. In second appeal, by Ext.P16 the Tribunal had directed ascertainment of the business income of the assessee and allow deduction under Section 80B. The order impugned at Exts.P17, P18 and P19 in the writ petition are the orders giving effect to the appellate order, which subsequent orders are challenged before the learned Single Judge. We do not see any similarity between the issue imugned in the writ petition and and that raised in Annexure A. 5. We are left with the order of the learned Single Judge which directed payment of 20 of the demand within one month which is an exercise of discretion, we would not interfere in appeal unless there is shown arbitrariness or illegality. Writ Appeal No.1126/2020 ::5:: The appellant is granted two months' time from today, if he pays 10 of the amounts by 30.09.2020 and another 10 by 30.11.2020. Writ Appeal is rejected in limine, with the above observation.


IN HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI MONDAY, 24TH DAY OF AUGUST 2020 / 2ND BHADRA, 1942 WA.No.1126 OF 2020 AGAINST ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 15139/2020(N) OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA APPELLANT: RANNI SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE LTD NO.65, RANNY P.O.PATHANAMTHITTA-689672. REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. BY ADV. SRI.C.A.JOJO RESPONDENTS: 1 INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3, T.K.ROAD, THIRUVALLA, THIRUVALLA-689101. 2 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), OFFICE OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUBLIC LIBRARY BUILDING KOTTAYAM-686 001. 3 ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, COCHIN BENCH, KAKKANAD, PIN-682 037. OTHER PRESENT: SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC,IT THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24.08.2020, COURT ON SAME DAY DELIVERED FOLLOWING: Writ Appeal No.1126/2020 ::2:: JUDGMENT Dated this 24th day of August, 2020 Vinod Chandran, J appellant is challenging interim order passed by learned Single Judge, wherein appellant was directed to pay 20% of demand made in Exts.P21, P22 and P23. learned Counsel appearing for appellant submits that in similar circumstances Division Bench of this Court issued Annexure judgment permitting Co-operative Bank to pay 1% of demand, for staying recovery while first appeal was pending. 2. learned Standing Counsel Sri.Jose Joseph submits that there is absolutely no similarity between facts as disclosed from Annexure Judgment and present case. We perfectly agree with said submission. Annexure Writ Appeal No.1126/2020 ::3:: was in circumstance of Cooperative Bank having been asked to give details of depositors, on refusal of which, Assessing Officer included deposits made by such undisclosed depositors as undisclosed income. At first appellate stage, Co-operative Bank conceded to demand made by Department and promised to disclose depositors. It was in such circumstances that Division Bench of this Court directed deposit of 1% pending first appeal. 3. In present case, assessee had travelled statutory path unsuccessfully. In second appeal, by Ext.P16 Tribunal had directed ascertainment of business income of assessee and allow deduction under Section 80B. order impugned at Exts.P17, P18 and P19 in writ petition are orders giving effect to appellate order, which subsequent orders are challenged before learned Single Judge. Writ Appeal No.1126/2020 ::4:: 4. It is pertinent that issue dealt with by statutory authority was not with respect to details of depositors, but with respect to transferring of provisions and reserves to P&L account and claiming deduction under Section 80P. These are all adjustments made in account which were found to be not proper by Assessing Officer, in addition to which relief under Section 80P was also declined. Tribunal had merely directed deduction to be granted under Section 80P after ascertaining business income. In such circumstances, we do not see any similarity between issue imugned in writ petition and and that raised in Annexure A. 5. We are left with order of learned Single Judge which directed payment of 20% of demand within one month which is exercise of discretion, we would not interfere in appeal unless there is shown arbitrariness or illegality. Writ Appeal No.1126/2020 ::5:: appellant is granted two months' time from today, if he pays 10% of amounts by 30.09.2020 and another 10% by 30.11.2020. Writ Appeal is rejected in limine, with above observation. Sd/- K. Vinod Chandran,Judge Sd/- T.R Ravi, Judge jma Writ Appeal No.1126/2020 ::6:: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE A TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN WA NO 1196 OF 2018 DATED 23.7.2018 ANNEXURE B UNDERTAKING AFFIDAVIT Ranni Service Co-Operative Ltd. v. Income-tax Officer Ward-3, Thiruvalla / Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Kottayam / Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Cochin Bench, Kakkanad
Report Error