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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL THURSDAY, THE 05TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 15TH PHALGUNA, 1941WP(C).No.5494 OF 2020(J) PETITIONER: THE KUMARAMPUTHUR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO. P 373NO.P 373,MANNARKKAD COLLEGE.P.O, KUMARAMPUTHUR,MANNARKKAD, PALAKKAD-678583, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY-IN-CHARGE, N.KRISHNADAS, AGED 57, S/O RAGHAVAN NAIR. BY ADVS.SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENONSMT.MEERA V.MENON RESPONDENTS: 1THE INCOME TAX OFFICERWARD 4,AYAKAR BHAVAN,PALAKKAD-678014.WARD 4,AYAKAR BHAVAN,PALAKKAD-678014. 2THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS),AYAKAR BHAVAN,THRISSUR-680001.AYAKAR BHAVAN,THRISSUR-680001. 3THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,AYAKAR BHAVAN,KAKKANADU, KOCHI-682030,REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR.AYAKAR BHAVAN,KAKKANADU, KOCHI-682030,REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR. SC ADV.JOSE JOSEPH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON05.03.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT The grievance of the petitioner in the instant case isthat against the order of assessment, Ext.P1 and appellateorder Ext.P2, preferred a second appeal, Ext.P3 before the3[rd] respondent ie., the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT)along with the interim application, Ext.P4 dated 12.02.2020,till such time, the contemplated coercive measures againstthe petitioner may be kept in abeyance. 2. Counsel for the Revenue submits that the writpetition would not lie as the remedy for the petitioner is topress the pending stay application before the ITAT. Counsel for the Revenue submits that the writ Having heard the learned counsel for the parties andapprised the paper book, I am of the view that the pleadingsare bereft of any steps for taking of possession by makingmention or otherwise before the ITAT. Be that as it may,considering the fact that no steps of demand or attachmentproceedings under Section 281 of the Income Tax Act havebeen initiated, I dispose of the writ petition with a direction to 3[rd] respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on the application of stay in accordance with law, asexpeditiously as possible within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. nak Sd/- AMIT RAWAL JUDGE APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2012-13 EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF APPELLATE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2012-13 EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT 2012-13 EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT //TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE