While Assailing The Assessment Order Before The 1[St] Respondent, Petitioner Hassought To Canvass That The Judgment Of The Supreme Court In Mavilayi Service Co- v. Commissioner Of Income Tax; 2021 (1) Klt 485 Nowgoverns The Field Thereby Rendering The Assessment Itself As Incorrect

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMPRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. WEDNESDAY, THE 13 DAY OF JULY 2022 / 22ND ASHADHA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 22625 OF 2022 PETITIONER: ULIYACOVIL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD(NO.1003) ASRAMOM, KOLLAM REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY K K SANTHI, PIN - 691002BY ADVS.MARTHANDA VARMA PANDALAI.KS.HEMALATHA RESPONDENTS: 1THE COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)NATIONAL FACELESS APPEALS CENTRE (NFAC), INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, DELHI, PIN - 1100012INCOME TAX OFFICERWARD-4, KOLLAM, PIN - 691001 BY ADV CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON13.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J U D G M E N T Petitioner is a Co-operative bank registered as Primary Agricultural Credit Societyunder the provisions of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969. Ext.P1 order ofassessment was issued against the petitioner. In the assessment order, petitioner's claimfor deduction under Section 80P was rejected on the ground that there was no evidence toshow that petitioner satisfied the ingredients of the Primary Agricultural Credit Society ascontemplated under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act. 2. While assailing the assessment order before the 1[st] respondent, petitioner hassought to canvass that the judgment of the Supreme Court in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax; 2021 (1) KLT 485 nowgoverns the field thereby rendering the assessment itself as incorrect. 3.Since the petitioner has already preferred an appeal as per Ext.P2 and thesame is pending consideration before the 1[st] respondent, I deem it fit that this writ petitionbe disposed of directing the 1[st] respondent to consider the appeal in a time bound manner.4.Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 1[st] respondent to consider andpass appropriate orders on Ext.P2, as expeditiously as possible within a period of 2months from the date of receipt of a copy of a this judgment.. 5. Till the disposal of the appeal, no coercive steps shall be initiated against thepetitioner pursuant to Exts.P1 & P3 . The writ petition is disposed of as above. AMG Sd/-GOPINATH P. JUDGE APPENDIX OF WP(C) 22625/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER-INTIMATION U/S 143(1) PASSED ON 28/5/2020 FOR THE A.Y.2019-20Exhibit P2TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED ON 26-06-2020 Exhibit P3TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE(U/S 221 OF THE IT ACT) DATED7-7-2022 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT