The Mannarkkad Taluk Co-Operative Employees Co-Op. Society Ltd.no. P 629,Mannarkkad, Palakkad v. Menonmeera V.menonr.sreejithk.krishna

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. TUESDAY, THE 27 DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022 / 5TH ASWINA, 1944WP(C) NO. 30668 OF 2022 PETITIONER/S: THE MANNARKKAD TALUK CO-OPERATIVE EMPLOYEES CO-OP. SOCIETY LTD.NO. P 629,MANNARKKAD, PALAKKAD, REPRESENTED BY ITSSECRETARY, P.K. MOHANDAS,, PIN - 678582BY ADVS.HARISANKAR V. MENONMEERA V.MENONR.SREEJITHK.KRISHNA RESPONDENT/S: 1THE ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME TAX OFFICERNATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTREDELHI, PIN - 1100012NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRENATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE,DELHI , REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)., PIN - 110001ADV. JOSE JOSEPH (SC) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON27.09.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 30668 OF 2022 2 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 petitioneron 29.03.2022. In the assessment order, petitioner's claimfor deduction under Section 80P was rejected on the groundthat there was no evidence to show that petitioner satisfiedthe ingredients of the Primary Agricultural Credit Society ascontemplated under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act. 2. While assailing the assessment order before the 2[nd]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 an appealas Ext.P2 along with Ext.P4 application for stay and anapplication for condonation of delay (Ext.P3) of 137 days, andthe same is pending consideration before the 2[nd] respondent,I deem it fit that this writ petition be disposed of, directing theAppellate Authority to consider the delay petition and the stay ajt petition in a time bound manner. 4. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of thecase, this writ petition is disposed of, directing the 2[nd]respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3 applicationfor condonation of delay and also on Ext.P4 application forstay filed in Ext.P2 appeal, after affording to the petitioner anopportunity of hearing, within a period of two months from thedate of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. It is madeclear that orders need to be passed on the stay petition onmerits, only if the the delay in filing the appeal is condoned. 5. Till the disposal of the delay petition and stay petition,no coercive steps shall be initiated against the petitionerpursuant to Ext.P1 assessment order. The writ petition is disposed of as above. sd/- GOPINATH P.JUDGE WP(C) NO. 30668 OF 2022 4 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 30668/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITSExhibit P1 Exhibit P2 Exhibit P3 Exhibit P4 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2016-17 DTD. 29-03-2022 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORETHE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD. 12-09-2022COPY OF DELAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD,. 12-09-2022 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONERBEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD. 06-09-2022