Sri.harisankar v. Menon
High Court
28 Sep 2020 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Sri.harisankar v. Menon
Date of order
28 Sep 2020
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Sri.harisankar v. Menon, the High Court (2020) decided the matter.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
MONDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2020 / 6TH ASWINA, 1942
WP(C).No.20046 OF 2020(E)
JUDGMENT
Against Ext.P1 assessment order under the Income Tax Act, thepetitioner preferred an appeal before the First Appellate Authority butthe same was rejected by Ext.P2 order. Aggrieved by the said order, thepetitioner preferred Ext.P3 appeal along with Ext.P4 stay petition beforethe 3[rd] respondent. It is the contention of the learned counsel for thepetitioner that the issue involved in the appeal is the permissibility ofdeduction under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act in its application toCo-Operative Societies. It is pointed out that in similar matters thisCourt has directed the appellate authority to consider and pass orders inthe appeal and stayed the recovery proceedings, in the meanwhile.
2. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioneras also the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents.
On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case andthe submissions made across the Bar and the finding that in similarcases this Court has granted stay of recovery proceedings, pendingdisposal of the appeal by the appellate authority, I dispose the writpetition by directing the 3[rd] respondent to consider and pass orders on
Ext.P3 appeal preferred by the petitioner within an outer time limit of sixmonths from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after hearingthe petitioner. I also make it clear that till such time as orders are passedby the 3[rd] respondent in the appeal as directed above and the orderscommunicated to the petitioner, recovery steps for recovery of amountsconfirmed against the petitioner by Exts.P1 and P2 orders shall be keptin abeyance. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgmenttogether with a copy of the writ petition before the 3[rd] respondent forfurther action.
Sd/- A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2015-16 DATED 26.12.2017.
EXHIBIT P2COPY OF APPELLATE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2015-16 DATED 25.08.2020.
EXHIBIT P3COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORETHE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2015-16 DATED19.09.2020.
EXHIBIT P4COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONERBEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 19.09.2020
RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.A 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.