Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd v. Wp(C)
High Court
19 Jul 2021 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd v. Wp(C)
Date of order
19 Jul 2021
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd v. Wp(C), the High Court (2021) decided the matter.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
PETITIONER:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.M.BADARMONDAY, THE 19 DAY OF JULY 2021 / 28TH ASHADHA, 1943WP(C) NO. 14282 OF 2021
THE AMBALLUR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO. 503,MANNAMPETTA, P.O. VARAKKARA, ALAGAPPANAGAR,THRISSUR-680 302,REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.BY ADVS.P.C.SASIDHARANK.S.ANIL1THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS),NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE,DELHI-110001.2THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,O/O THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,AYAKAR BHAVAN, MANACHIRA, KOZHIKODE,KERALA-673 001.3THE INCOME TAX OPFFICER,WARD 2(1), THRISSUR,OFFICE OF THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,THRISSUR.R1-3 BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH,STANDING COUNSEL
RESPONDENTS:
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON19.07.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 19[th] day of July 2021
The learned Standing Counsel takes
notice for all respondents. Heard both sides.
2.ThepetitionerisaPrimary
Agricultural Credit Society. The petitioner wasassessed for the year 2018-2019. It is thecase of the petitioner that the assessment iscontrary to the law laid down by the Hon'bleSupreme Court in the matter of The Mavilayi
Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. Vs Commissionerof Income Tax, Calicut reported in 2021 (1) KHC303 (SC). The petitioner prefer an appeal alongwith the stay petition before the 1[st]respondent. However, no orders are passed onthe stay petition, as it is informed to thepetitioner that the request of stay can beconsidered on payment of 20% of the tax
demanded.
3.The learned counsel for the petitionersubmitted that the petition be disposed of interms of judgment of the learned Division Benchof this Court in W.A.No.1536/2019.
4.The learned counsel appearing for therespondents fairly state that the petition canbe disposed of in the light of the judgment ofthe learned Division Bench of this Court inExt.P8.
In this view of the matter, consideringthe law laid down by this Court while decidingW.A. Nos.1529, 1530, 1535 & 1536 of 2019 on 1[st]July, 2019, Ext.P8, the petition is disposed ofwith a direction to the 1[st] respondent to decidethe statutory appeal filed by the petitionerherein at the earliest according to law andtill disposal of the appeal, the respondentsshall keep in abeyance the recovery and
4
collection of the tax assessed as per theassessment order.
Sd/-
A.M.BADARJUDGE
SSK/19/07
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED18-01-2021.
EXHIBIT P2TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED18-01-2021.
EXHIBIT P3TRUE COPYP OF THE APPEAL DATED 10-02-2021.
EXHIBIT P4TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF RECEIPT OFFORM SHOWING THE DATE OF FILING AS 10/02/2021.FORM SHOWING THE DATE OF FILING AS 10/02/2021.
EXHIBIT P5TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 22-06-2021.EXHIBIT P6TRUE COPY OF THE SAY PETITION DATED06-07-2021.
EXHIBIT P7TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 12-03-2020 INW.P.(C) 7600 OF 2020.
EXHIBIT P8TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 01-07-2019 INW.A. 1536 OF 2019.
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:NIL
SSK //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE
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.