By Advs.sri.harisankar v. Menonsmt.meera V.menon
High Court
18 Mar 2020 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
By Advs.sri.harisankar v. Menonsmt.meera V.menon
Date of order
18 Mar 2020
Assessment year(s)
2014-15
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In By Advs.sri.harisankar v. Menonsmt.meera V.menon, the High Court (2020) dismissed the appeal.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMPRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1941
WP(C).No.8450 OF 2020(E)
PETITIONER/S:
THE KARAKURISSI SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,NO.P 1025, KARAKURISSI, PALAKKAD - 678 595,. REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, A JAYASREE, AGED 48, D/O.A.ANIYAN MENON.
BY ADVS.SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENONSMT.MEERA V.MENON
RESPONDENT/S:
1THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD 4, AYAKAR BHAVAN, PALAKKAD - 678 014.2THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS),THRISSUR - 680 021.3THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,AYAKAR BHAVAN, KAKKANADU, KOCHI - 682 030, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON18.03.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.8450 OF 2020
J U D G M E N T
Dated this the 18th day of March 2020
The petitioner, a primary agricultural credit society,against assessment order dated 19.2.2016 Ext.P1 pertainingto assessment year 2014-15, preferred an appeal before theCommissioner of Income Tax having jurisdiction. Theaforementioned appeal, vide order dated 17.02.2020 Ext.P2was dismissed. Counsel for the petitioner submits thatagainst aforementioned dismissal order, preferred an appealbefore the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ernakulam Ext.P3and a stay application in Ext.P4 dated 13.03.2020 and thesame are pending consideration. However as per theassertions made in the Writ Petition, the threat of coercivesteps is looming large. Her client would be satisfied in caseappropriate directions are issued to the ITAT to consider thestay application in accordance with law within some timeframe.
2.Issue notice before admission. Mr. Jose Josephaccepts notice on behalf of the respondents and submits that
WP(C).No.8450 OF 2020
in case any direction by this court, the Income Tax AppellateTribunal may be in difficulty in deciding the applications,since numerous appeals prior to the appeal of the petitionerare pending consideration.
3.Having heard the counsel for the parties, withoutexpressing any views on the merits of the case, I dispose ofthis writ petition with a direction to the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Ernakulam to consider the application for stayExt.P4 submitted in support of Ext.P3 appeal, in accordancewith law, after affording opportunity of hearing to thepetitioner and as well as the revenue and pass an orderwithin a period of 45 days from the receipt of certified copyof this judgment. Till such time if any coercive measures arecontemplated or any demand is raised, it is ordered to bekept in abeyance till the adjudication of stay application.
Sd/-
AMIT RAWALJUDGE
WP(C).No.8450 OF 2020
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1
COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2014-15.
EXHIBIT P2
COPY OF APPELLATE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2014-15.
EXHIBIT P3
COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT 2014-15.
EXHIBIT P4
COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
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.