SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 30414

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Ziyad Rahman A.A., J
Paravur West Co-Operative Bank Ltd – Appellant
Versus
Income Tax Officer – Respondent
WP(C) No. 17505 of 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: V.P. Narayanan, M.M. Monaye, M. Paul Varghese
For the Respondents: Jose Joseph

Recovery proceedings during the pendency of stay petitions filed before appellate authorities should be stayed until the adjudication of said stay petitions to prevent potential injustice.

Headnote:The petitioner filed this writ petition challenging the recovery proceedings initiated by the revenue authorities while their appeals and stay petitions regarding assessment orders for the years 2020-21 and 2024-25 were pending. The relevant provisions of the tax legislation provide for an appellate remedy, and the petitioner argued that recovery efforts during the pendency of stay applications cause undue hardship. The court addressed the primary issue of whether coercive recovery measures should be halted while stay applications remain undecided. The court observed that it is appropriate for the appellate and assessment authorities to consider the stay petitions within a reasonable timeframe to ensure the assessee is not prejudiced, and pending such consideration, recovery proceedings should be stayed. The court directed the appellate and assessment authorities to dispose of the stay petitions within a period of two months, ordering that recovery proceedings be kept in abeyance until such decisions are rendered.

Table of Content
1. existence of pending stay petitions and resultant threat of recovery proceedings. (Para 1 , 2)
2. interim directives to keep recovery in abeyance pending disposal of stay applications by the authorities. (Para 3 , 4)

JUDGMENT

The petitioner, who is an assessee under the Income Tax Act, 1965, has filed Exts.P3 and P4 appeals being aggrieved by Exts.P1 and P2 assessment orders pertaining to the assessment years 2020-21 and 2024-2025. Along with Exts.P3 and P4 appeals, Exts.P3(a) and P4(a)

stay petitions were also submitted.

2. Grievance of the petitioner is with regard to the recovery that is being pursued by the respondents, pending consideration of the appeals and the stay petitions. This writ petition is submitted in such circumstances.

3. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, I am inclined to dispose of this writ petition.

4. Accordingly, it is ordered that the 3rd respondent shall take up Ext.P3(a) stay petition and 2nd respondent shall take up Ext.P4(a) stay petition and pass appropriate orders thereon within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this judgment.

Until such a decision is taken, the recovery proceedings pursuant to Exts.P1 and P2 assessment orders shall be kept in abeyance.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top