By Advs.sri.harisankar v. Menonsmt.meera V.menonsmt.k.krishna

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.20082 OF 2020(I) PETITIONER/S: THE MUNDUR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,NO F 1650, MUNDUR, PALAKKAD-678 592, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, JIJUMON A.J. BY ADVS.SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENONSMT.MEERA V.MENONSMT.K.KRISHNA RESPONDENT/S: 1THE INCOME TAX OFFICERWARD 2, AYAKAR BHAVAN, PALAKKAD-670 014.WARD 2, AYAKAR BHAVAN, PALAKKAD-670 014. 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; JOSE JOSEPH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON28.09.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2 JUDGMENT Against Ext.P1 assessment order under the Income Tax Act, thepetitioner preferred an appeal before the First Appellate Authority but thesame was rejected by Ext.P2 order. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitionerpreferred Ext.P3 appeal along with Ext.P4 stay petition before the 3rdrespondent. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner thatthe issue involved in the appeal is the permissibility of deduction underSection 80P of the Income Tax Act in its application to Co-Operative Societies.It is pointed out that in similar matters this Court has directed the appellateauthority to consider and pass orders in the appeal and stayed the recoveryproceedings, 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 thisCourt has granted stay of recovery proceedings, pending disposal of the appealby the appellate authority, I dispose the writ petition by directing the 3rdrespondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3 appeal preferred by thepetitioner within an outer time limit of six months from the date of receipt of acopy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner. I also make it clear that tillsuch time as orders are passed by the 3rd respondent in the appeal as directedabove and the orders communicated to the petitioner, recovery steps for 3 recovery of amounts confirmed against the petitioner by Exts.P1 and P2 ordersshall be kept in abeyance. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgmenttogether with a copy of the writ petition before the 3rd respondent for furtheraction. Sd/- A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIARJUDGE SJ APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2017-18 DATED 24.12.2019 EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF APPELLATE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2017-18 DATED 25.8.2020 EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT 2017-18 DATED 19.9.2020 EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 19.9.2020