The Kattoor Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd v. By Advs. C.a.jojo Mathews Joseph
High Court
22 Jul 2022 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
The Kattoor Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd v. By Advs. C.a.jojo Mathews Joseph
Date of order
22 Jul 2022
Assessment year(s)
2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In The Kattoor Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd v. By Advs. C.a.jojo Mathews Joseph, the High Court (2022) decided the matter.
Decision: The writ petition is disposed of as above.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMPRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
FRIDAY, THE 22 DAY OF JULY 2022 / 31ST ASHADHA, 1944WP(C) NO. 23759 OF 2022
PETITIONERS:
THE KATTOOR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO.426, KATTOOR P O, THRISSUR DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN-680 702. REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY VIJAYAKUMAR T V.
BY ADVS. C.A.JOJO MATHEWS JOSEPH
RESPONDENTS:
1THE INCOME TAX OFFICERWARD2 (1), AYAKAR BHAVAN, SAKTHAN STAND, THRISSUR-680 001.
2THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( APPEALS)NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE,NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110 001.
3INCOME TAX OFFICER,NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE,NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110001.
BY ADV JOSE JOSEPH, SC, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, KERALA
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FORADMISSION ON 22.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAYDELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Petitioner is a Primary Agricultural Credit Societyregistered under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act,1969. Exts.P1, P4 & P7 assessment orders were issuedagainst the petitioner on 25.03.2022, 24.03.2022 &25.03.2022 respectively. In the assessment order,petitioner's claim for deduction under Section 80P wasrejected on the ground that there was no evidence to showthat petitioner satisfied the ingredients of the PrimaryAgricultural Credit Society as contemplated under theKerala Co-operative Societies Act.
2. While assailing the assessment orders 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 renderingthe assessment itself as incorrect.
3. Since the petitioner has already preferred appeals
as Exts.P3, P6 & P9 and the same are pending
W.P.(C) No.23759/2022
consideration before the 3[rd] respondent, I deem it fit thatthis writ petition be disposed of directing the AppellateAuthority to consider the appeals in a time bound manner.4. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 3[rd]respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders onExt.P3, P6 & P9 as expeditiously as possible.
5. Till the disposal of the appeals, no coercive stepsshall be initiated against the petitioner pursuant to Ext.P1,P4 & P7 assessment orders and Exts.P2, P5 & P8 demandnotices.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/- JUDGE
GOPINATH P.
ats
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 23759/2022
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AY 2014-15 DATED 25.03.2022 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT15 DATED 25.03.2022 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT
Exhibit P2A TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 25.03.2022 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT25.03.2022 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT
Exhibit P3
A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FOR AY 2014-15 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 15.07.2022FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 15.07.2022
Exhibit P4A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AY 2015-16 DATED 24.03.2022 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT16 DATED 24.03.2022 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT
Exhibit P5
A TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 24.03.2022 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT24.03.2022 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT
Exhibit P6
A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FOR AY 2015-16 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 15.07.2022FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 15.07.2022
Exhibit P7
A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AY 2016-17 DATED 25.03.2022 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT17 DATED 25.03.2022 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT
Exhibit P8
A TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 25.03.2022 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT25.03.2022 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT
Exhibit P9A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FOR AY 2016-17 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 15.07.2022FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 15.07.2022
Exhibit P5
A TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 24.03.2022 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT24.03.2022 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT
Exhibit P6
A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FOR AY 2015-16 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 15.07.2022FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 15.07.2022
Exhibit P7
A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AY 2016-17 DATED 25.03.2022 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT17 DATED 25.03.2022 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT
Exhibit P8
A TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 25.03.2022 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT25.03.2022 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT
Exhibit P9A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FOR AY 2016-17 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 15.07.2022FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 15.07.2022
Exhibit P10A TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE FOR AN AMOUNT OF RS.90,83, 94,980/-FOR AYS 2014-15 TO 2016-17 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED04.07.2022AMOUNT OF RS.90,83, 94,980/-FOR AYS 2014-15 TO 2016-17 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED04.07.2022
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.