By Advs.sri.harisankar v. Menonsmt.meera V.menon
High Court
07 May 2019 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
By Advs.sri.harisankar v. Menonsmt.meera V.menon
Date of order
07 May 2019
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In By Advs.sri.harisankar v. Menonsmt.meera V.menon, the High Court (2019) decided the matter.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
TUESDAY, THE 07TH DAY OF MAY 2019 / 17TH VAISAKHA, 1941
WP(C).No. 13094 of 2019
PETITIONER/S:
THE KALLADIKODE SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.P 7489, KALLADIKODE.P.O., PALAKKAD-678596, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY BINOY JOSEPH, AGED 43,S/O.JOSEPH.P.U
BY ADVS.SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENONSMT.MEERA V.MENON
RESPONDENT/S:
1THE INCOME TAX OFFICERWARD 4, AYAKAR BHAVAN, PALAKKAD-670014.
2THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX(APPEALS), SAKTHAN NAGAR, THRISSUR-680021.
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI JOSE JOSEPH-STANDING COUNSEL
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.05.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
ANU SIVARAMAN, J.
-----------------------------------------------
W.P(C).No. 13094 of 2019
-----------------------------------------------Dated this the 7[th] day of May, 2019
JUDGMENT
Petitioner is a primary credit society which has been issued withassessment order under the Income Tax Act. Being aggrieved by theassessment order, the petitioner has preferred statutory appeal,Exhibit P2, before the 2[nd] respondent appellate authority under theIncome Tax Act. He has also preferred Exhibit P3 stay petition in theappeal. However, it is contended that demands are being raised interms of the assessment orders.
2. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as
the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents, I am ofthe opinion that the appeal preferred by the petitioner institution isliable to be considered and disposed of on merits before proceedingwith the recovery of amounts in terms of the orders passed by theassessment authority.
In the above view of the matter, there will be a direction to the2[nd] respondent appellate authority to take up consider and passappropriate orders on Exhibit P2 appeal preferred by the petitionerand to dispose of the same in accordance with law at the earliest, at
WP(C).13094/19
any rate, within three months from the date of receipt of a copy ofthis judgment. Till orders are passed on the appeal, as directedabove, coercive proceedings on the basis of the original order shall bekept in abeyance.
Writ petition is ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
ANU SIVARAMAN
JUDGE
vgs7/5
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1
COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2017-18
EXHIBIT P2
COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2017-18
EXHIBIT P3
COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2017-18
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.