Respondent, Petitioner Has Sought To Canvass That Thejudgment Of The Supreme Court In Mavilayi Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd v. Commissioner Of Income Tax [2021(1) Klt 485] Now Governs The Field Thereby Rendering Theassessment Itself As Incorrect

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. WEDNESDAY, THE 6 DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 16TH PHALGUNA, 1945WP(C) NO. 8946 OF 2024 PETITIONER/S: ANJARAKANDY FARMERS SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED(AFSC BANK) NO.1141, P.O. MAMBA, KANNUR REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR MANOJ KUMAR P, PIN - 670611 BY ADVS. K.P.PRADEEP T.T.BIJU T.THASMI M.J.ANOOPA RESPONDENT/S: 1THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES , REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN,DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NORTH BLOCK ,NEW DELHI, PIN - 110001 2ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI ROOM NO. 401, 2ND FLOOR, E-RAMP, JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM, DELHI, PIN - 110003FLOOR, E-RAMP, JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM, DELHI, PIN - 110003 3COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE (NFAC), DELHI, ROOM NO. 401, 2ND FLOOR, E-RAMP, JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM, DELHI, PIN - 110003 SRI. CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM , SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT Petitioner is a Primary Agricultural Credit Societyregistered under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969.Ext.P1 order of assessment was issued against the petitioner on26.09.2022. In the assessment order, petitioner's claim fordeduction under Section 80P was rejected on the ground thatthere was no evidence to show that petitioner satisfied theingredients of the Primary Agricultural Credit Society ascontemplated under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act. 2. While assailing the assessment order before the 3[rd] respondent, petitioner has sought to canvass that thejudgment of the Supreme Court in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax [2021(1) KLT 485] now governs the field thereby rendering theassessment itself as incorrect. 3. Since the petitioner has already preferred an appeal as Ext.P2 and the same is pending consideration before the 3[rd]respondent, I deem it fit that this writ petition be disposed ofdirecting the Appellate Authority to consider the appeal in atime bound manner. WP(C) NO. 8946 OF 2024 3 4. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 3[rd]respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P2,as expeditiously as possible. 5. Till the disposal of the appeal, no coercive steps shall beinitiated against the petitioner pursuant to Ext.P1 assessmentorder and Ext.P3 demand notice. The writ petition is disposed of as above.. ajt Sd/- GOPINATH P.JUDGE APPENDIX OF WP(C) 8946/2024 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NOITBA/AST/S/143(3)/2022-23/1045950898(1) DATED26-09-2022 ISSUED FOR THE YEAR 2020-21 BY THE2NDRESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER Exhibit P2TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 21-10-2022FILED FOR THE YEAR 2020-21 BEFORE THE3RDRESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONERExhibit P3TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE NO.ITBA/AST/S/156/2022-23/1045950955(1)DATED26-09-2022 ISSUED FOR THE YEAR 2020-21 BY THE2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONERExhibit P4TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 23-02-2022 INWPC NO 6109 OF 2022