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 THURSDAY, THE 01ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2020 / 9TH ASWINA, 1942 WP(C).No.20513 OF 2020(L) PETITIONER/S: THE KUMARAMPUTHUR CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LIMITED NO P.813,KUMARAMPUTHUR, MANNARKKAD, PALAKKAD-678 583, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY-IN-CHARGE, SURESH BABU E. BY ADVS.SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENONSMT.MEERA V.MENON RESPONDENT/S: 1THE INCOME TAX OFFICERWARD 4, AYAKAR BHAVAN, PALAKKAD-678 014.WARD 4, AYAKAR BHAVAN, PALAKKAD-678 014. 2THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS),THRISSUR-680 021.THRISSUR-680 021. 3THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,AYAKAR BHAVAN, KAKKANADU, KOCHI-682 030, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR. OTHER PRESENT: SC: SRI.JOSE JOSEPH FOR RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON01.10.2020, 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 similarmatters this Court has directed the appellate authority to consider and pass ordersin the appeal and stayed the recovery proceedings, in the meanwhile. 2. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as also thelearned 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 confirmedagainst 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 NAMBIAR JUDGE APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2017-18 DATED 26.12.2019 EXHIBIT P2COPY OF APPELLATE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2017-18 DATED 15.9.2020 EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT 2017-18 DATED 26.9.2020 EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF STAY PETITION FIELD BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 26.9.2020