By Advs.sri.harisankar v. Menon

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF FEBRUARY 2018 / 2ND PHALGUNA, 1939 WP(C).No. 5720 of 2018 PETITIONER(S) THE MANNARKKAD RURAL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. 8/767, MANNARKKAD, PALAKKAD-678582, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PURUSHOTHAMAN.M., BY ADVS.SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON SMT.MEERA V.MENON SMT.K.KRISHNA RESPONDENT(S): 1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, WARDNO.2., PALAKKAD-678001. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, THRISSUR-680001. R BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21-02-2018,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2013-14 DATE 21/3/2016EXHIBIT P1(A) COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDR ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2015-16 DATE 22/12/2017EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. DATE 28/4/2016EXHIBIT P2(A) COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. DATE 17/1/2018EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. DATE 22/4/2016EXHIBIT P3(A) COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.9/1/2018 // true copy // PS TO JUDGE P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C).No.5720 of 2018 = = = = = = = = = = = = =Dated this the 21[st] day of February, 2018 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is an assessee under the Income Tax Act(the Act) on the rolls of the first respondent. Aggrieved byExt.P1 series assessment orders, the petitioner preferred Ext.P2series appeals before the second respondent. Ext.P3 series arethe applications for stay preferred by the petitioner in Ext.P2series appeals. The grievance of the petitioner in the writpetition concerns the delay on the part of the secondrespondent in passing orders on Ext.P3 series applications forstay. It is alleged by the petitioner in the writ petition thatproceedings have already been initiated for realisation of theamounts covered by Ext.P1 series orders. The petitioner,therefore, seeks appropriate directions in this regard, in thiswrit petition. 2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as WPC.No.5720 of 2018 also the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of thecase, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petitiondirecting the second respondent to take a decision on Ext.P3series applications for stay, within two months from the date ofreceipt of a copy of this judgment. Ordered accordingly.Needless to say that until orders are passed on Ext.P3 seriesapplications for stay, further proceedings for realisation of theamounts covered by Ext.P1 series assessment orders shall bedeferred. Sd/-P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE. Kvs/- // true copy //