Back
2011 Supreme(Online)(KER) 28954
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
S. SIRI JAGAN, J
RAJAKKADU SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD – Appellant
Versus
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIB – Respondent
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) 18194/2011
Pending Supreme Court decisions and stays must be observed by lower courts in similar proceedings to ensure legal consistency.
Headnote:
Taxation - Co-operative Banks - Income Tax Act Section List - The court upheld the principle that pending Supreme Court judgments should guide lower courts on similar matters, ensuring consistency and adherence to established legal precedents.
Fact of the Case:
Co-operative banks contested proceedings initiated by Income Tax authorities under Section 133(6) of the Income Tax Act, arguing the liability for providing information was under appeal in the Supreme Court, which had granted a stay.
Issues: Whether the Co-operative banks are required to furnish information as per Income Tax authorities in light of ongoing Supreme Court appeals.
Ratio Decidendi: Pending appeals in the Supreme Court, particularly those granting stays, should direct the course of action in related lower court cases.
Final Decision: The writ petitions were disposed of in accordance with the Supreme Court's pending judgment.
JUDGMENT
The petitioners are Co-operative banks. They are aggrieved by the proceedings initiated by the Income Tax authorities directing the petitioners to furnish details as per Section 133 (6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 . According to the petitioners, the very question as to the liability of similarly placed petitioners for divulging the information called for is pending in appeal before the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court has granted a stay in the appeal pending before the Supreme Court. They further submit that in view of the pendency of the appeal and stay by the Supreme Court, this Court has also considered and passed orders in respect of the subject matter in W.A.No.290/2010 . The petitioners submit that they are also entitled to similar reliefs.
2. I have heard the learned Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department also. In W.A.No.290/2010 , by Ext.P3 judgment, a Division Bench of this Court has held as follows:
W.P.(C)No.18194/11 &Con.cases 2 “This writ appeal is filed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge disposing the applicant's challenge against the details called for by the Income Tax Department, following the Division Bench judgment of this Court in W.A.No.2553 of 2009 and connected cases. Even though the Division Bench upheld the similar notices and declared entitlement of the Department to call for details from the Co-operative Banks, the Honourable Supreme Court has granted stay against operation of the judgment.
In the circumstances, we dispose of this writ appeal with a direction to the respondents to proceed against the appellant based on fresh orders or final judgment of the Supreme Court in the pending matters. In other words, the judgment of the Supreme Court in the pending cases will be followed in the case of the appellant as well without insisting the parties to take up the matter to the Supreme Court.
I am satisfied that these writ petitions can also be disposed of in terms of that judgment.
Accordingly, these writ petitions are disposed of in terms of that judgment.
S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE acd W.P.(C)No.18194/11 &Con.cases 3 W.P.(C)No.18194/11 &Con.cases 4
