By Advs.sri.harisankar v. Menon

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR THURSDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF MARCH 2018 / 10TH PHALGUNA, 1939 WP(C).No. 6829 of 2018 ---------------------- PETITIONER : ---------- THE VELANTHAVALAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD 8/8.OZHALAPATHY, CHITTUR, PALAKKAD-678557, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, SURESHKUMAR K BY ADVS.SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON SMT.MEERA V.MENON SMT.K.KRISHNA RESPONDENTS: ----------- 1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, WARD NO.5, PALAKKAD-678001. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, THRISSUR-680001. BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01-03-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: bp 01/03/2018 APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS-----------------------EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2015-16 DATED 19/12/2016.EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 1/2/2017EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. bp01/3/2018 P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J. ---------------------------------------------W.P.(C) No.6829 of 2018---------------------------------------------Dated this the 1[st] day of March, 2018 JUDGMENT Petitioner is an assessee under the Income Tax Act(the Act) on the rolls of the first respondent. Aggrieved by Ext.P1assessment order, the petitioner preferred Ext.P2 appeal beforethe second respondent. Ext.P3 is the application for staypreferred by the petitioner in Ext.P2 appeal. The grievance ofthe petitioner in the writ petition concerns the delay on the partof the second respondent in passing orders on Ext.P3 applicationfor stay. It is alleged by the petitioner in the writ petition thatproceedings have already been initiated for realisation of theamounts covered by Ext.P1 assessment order. The petitioner,therefore, seeks appropriate directions in this regard, in this writpetition. 2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner asalso 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 petition WPC 6829/18 -:2:- directing the second respondent to take a decision on Ext.P3application for stay, within two months from the date of receiptof a copy of this judgment. Ordered accordingly. Needless to saythat until orders are passed on Ext.P3 application for stay, furtherproceedings for realisation of the amounts covered by Ext.P1assessment order shall be deferred. Sd/- vps 1/3 P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE /True Copy/PS to Judge