By Advs.harisankar v. Menonmeera V.menon
High Court
08 Jun 2021 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
By Advs.harisankar v. Menonmeera V.menon
Date of order
08 Jun 2021
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In By Advs.harisankar v. Menonmeera V.menon, the High Court (2021) decided the matter.
Decision: The writ petition is disposed of as above. uu 08.06.2021 Sd/- BECHU KURIAN THOMASJUDGE WP(C) NO.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
TUESDAY, THE 8 DAY OF JUNE 2021 / 18TH JYAISHTA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 11951 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:
THE KONGAD SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,NO.-P 538, KONGAD POST, PALAKKAD - 678631, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, SHYLA.K, AGED 57, D/O C.GANGADHARAN NAIR.
BY ADVS.HARISANKAR V. MENONMEERA V.MENON
RESPONDENT/S:
1.
THE ADDITIONAL / JOINT / DEPUTY / ASST. COMMISSIONER OFINCOME TAX / INCOME TAX OFFICER, NATIONAL e-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI - 110001.INCOME TAX / INCOME TAX OFFICER, NATIONAL e-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI - 110001.
2.
NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, DELHI - 110001, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.06.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-2-
JUDGMENT
Petitioner is a Co-operative Society allegedly carrying on the business ofproviding credit facilities to its members. Petitioner claimed the benefitunder Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. By Ext.P1 order ofassessment, the claim for deduction under Section 80P was rejected.Challenging Ext.P1, an appeal has been preferred before the 2[nd] respondent.A stay petition has also been preferred as is evident from Ext.P3(a).
2. I have heard learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as learnedStanding Counsel, who took notice on behalf of the department.
3. Considering the nature of the issues involved and the argumentsadvanced, I am of the view that this writ petition itself can be disposed of bydirecting the stay petition filed along with the statutory appeal to beconsidered in a time bound manner.
Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 2[nd] respondent to dispose ofthe stay petition Ext.P3(a) filed along with the statutory appeal. The staypetition shall be considered and disposed of within a period of four monthsfrom the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. All coercive action
-3-
pursuant to Ext.P1 shall be kept in abeyance till the disposal of the staypetition. The Petitioner shall furnish a copy of this judgment to the 2[nd]respondent for appropriate action.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.
uu
08.06.2021
Sd/-
BECHU KURIAN THOMASJUDGE
WP(C) NO. 11951 OF 2021
-4-
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
APPENDIX
EXHIBIT P1
COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2018-19
EXHIBIT P2COPY OF THE S.O.NO.3296(E) ISSUED BY THE MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NEW DELHI
EXHIBIT P2(a)COPY OF THE S.O.NO.3297(E) ISSUED BY THE MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NEW DELHI
EXHIBIT P3COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P3(a)COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE ADDITIONAL/JOINT/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, DELHI.
EXHIBIT P4
COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WP(C) NO.5849/2021.
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.