By Advs.sri.harisankar v. Menonsmt.meera V.menon

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI TUESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF JULY 2019 / 25TH ASHADHA, 1941WP(C).No.19280 of 2019 PETITIONER: THE KECHERY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,NO.R286, KECHERY P.O., THRISSUR 680 501, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY DAVIS P.A, AGED 44, S/O. P.D. ANTHONY. BY ADVS.SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENONSMT.MEERA V.MENON RESPONDENTS: 1THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD I AND TPS, IIND FLOOR, CITY PLAZA, WEST NADA, GURUVAYUR 680 101. 2THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS), SAKTHAN NAGAR, THRISSUR 680 021. SRI JOSE JOSEPH - SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16.07.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.19280 of 2019 JUDGMENT The petitioner filed appeal in Ext.P2 aggrieved by the order of assessment in Ext.P1 made under Section 80 P of theIncome Tax Act 1961. The petitioner has filed the appeal witha stay petition in Ext.P3. The petitioner prays for appropriatedirection to the appellate authority to consider and dispose ofExt.P3 expeditiously. 2.The case of petitioner is that either the mere filingof appeal or mere pendency of appeal does not amount togranting stay by the appellate authority. The delay inconsidering and disposing of Ext.P3 results in the assessingofficer taking steps for recovering the tax amount which isunder challenge in Ext.P2. The assessing officer, if issuccessful in his effort the statutory appeal would becomeeither academic or ineffective. It is further contended by thepetitioner that in the manner the law provides for protectingthe interest of appellant pending appeal, the order on staypetition is passed expeditiously. Hence the writ petition. The case of petitioner is that either the mere filing WP(C).No.19280 of 2019 3 3. Perused Exts.P1, P2 and P3. Prima facie I am satisfied that a case is made out for issuing necessarydirections to 2[nd] respondent to dispose of the stay petition inExt.P3 respectively. Having regard to the limited prayer and the grounds referred to above, this Court is satisfied that the writ petitioncan be disposed of by this order: (a)The appellate authority/2[nd] respondent considers and disposes of Ext.P3 application as earlyas possible, preferably within two months from thedate of receipt of copy of this judgment. (b)The respondents are directed not to takecoercive steps or recover the amounts determined inthe orders under appeal for two months from today. Sd/- S.V.BHATTIJUDGE APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:EXHIBIT P1COPY OF ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2016-17 DATED 21.11.2018.EXHIBIT P2COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2016-17 DATED 22.12.2018EXHIBIT P3COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FORTHE YEAR 2016-17 DATED 22.12.2018RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL \\TRUE COPY//PA TO JUDGE PV