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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR MONDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2020 / 6TH ASWINA, 1942 WP(C).No.20039 OF 2020(D) PETITIONER/S: THE MUNDUR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.F 1650,MUNDUR, PALAKKAD-678592, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, JIJUMON A.J. BY ADVS.SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENONSMT.MEERA V.MENON RESPONDENT/S: 1THE INCOME TAX OFFICERWARD 2, AYAKAR BHAVAN, PALAKKAD-670014.WARD 2, AYAKAR BHAVAN, PALAKKAD-670014. 2THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS),THRISSUR-680021. 3THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,BY ITS REGISTRAR. AYAKAR BHAVAN, KAKKANADU, KOCHI-682030, REPRESENTED OTHER PRESENT: SRI.JOSE JOSEPH,SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON28.09.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT Against Ext.P1 assessment order under the Income Tax Act, the petitionerpreferred an appeal before the First Appellate Authority but the same was rejectedby Ext.P2 order. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner preferred Ext.P3appeal along with Ext.P4 stay petition before the 3[rd] respondent. It is thecontention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the issue involved in theappeal is the permissibility of deduction under Section 80P of the Income Tax Actin its application to Co-Operative Societies. It is pointed out that in similar mattersthis Court has directed the appellate authority to consider and pass orders in theappeal and stayed the recovery proceedings, in the meanwhile. 2.I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as alsothe learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and thesubmissions made across the Bar and the finding that in similar cases this Courthas granted stay of recovery proceedings, pending disposal of the appeal by theappellate authority, I dispose the writ petition by directing the 3[rd] respondent toconsider and pass orders on Ext.P3 appeal preferred by the petitioner within anouter time limit of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment,after hearing the petitioner. I also make it clear that till such time as orders arepassed by the 3[rd] respondent in the appeal as directed above and the orderscommunicated to the petitioner, recovery steps for recovery of amounts confirmed against the petitioner by Exts.P1 and P2 orders shall be kept in abeyance. Thepetitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment together with a copy of the writpetition before the 3[rd] respondent for further action. Sd/- A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIARJUDGE sd APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2014-15 DATED 20.12.2016. EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF APPELLATE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2014-15, DATED 25.08.2020. EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT 2014-15, DATED 19.09.2020. EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 19.09.2020.