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 7TH DAY OF MARCH 2018 / 16TH PHALGUNA, 1939 WP(C).No. 7601 of 2018 PETITIONER THE AYALUR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., AYALUR, CHITTUR, PALAKKAD-678510, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PRADEEP G. 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, FOR INCOME TAX THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07-03-2018,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 2010-11. RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2010-11. EXHIBIT P1(a) COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2012-13. RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2012-13. EXHIBIT P1(b) COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2013-14. RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2013-14. EXHIBIT P1(c) COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2014-15. RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2014-15. EXHIBIT P1(d) COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2015-16. RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2015-16. EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER FOR THE YEAR 2010-11. YEAR 2010-11. EXHIBIT P2(a) COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER FOR THE YEAR 2012-13. YEAR 2012-13. EXHIBIT P2(b) COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER FOR THE YEAR 2013-14. YEAR 2013-14. EXHIBIT P2(c) COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER FOR THE YEAR 2014-15. YEAR 2014-15. EXHIBIT P2(d) COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER FOR THE YEAR 2015-16. YEAR 2015-16. EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER FOR THE YEAR 2010-11. THE YEAR 2010-11. EXHIBIT P3(a) COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER FOR THE YEAR 2012-13. THE YEAR 2012-13. EXHIBIT P3(b) COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER FOR THE YEAR 2013-14. THE YEAR 2013-14. EXHIBIT P3(c) COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER FOR THE YEAR 2014-15. THE YEAR 2014-15. EXHIBIT P3(d) COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER FOR THE YEAR 2015-16. THE YEAR 2015-16. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:NIL rsr //TRUE COPY// SD/- PA TO JUDGE P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.7601 of 2018 --------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 7[th] day of March, 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 preferredExt.P2 series appeals before the second respondent. Ext.P3series are the applications for stay preferred by the petitionerin Ext.P2 series appeals. The grievance of the petitioner in thewrit petition 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. 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 preferredExt.P2 series appeals before the second respondent. Ext.P3series are the applications for stay preferred by the petitionerin Ext.P2 series appeals. The grievance of the petitioner in thewrit petition 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 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 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. rsr Sd/- P.B.SURESH KUMAR JUDGE