While Assailing The Assessment Order Before The 2[Nd] Respondent, Petitionerhas Sought 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 ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. WEDNESDAY, THE 21 DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 30TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944WP(C) NO. 41580 OF 2022 PETITIONER: MUPPATHADAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO. E-216 AGED 50 YEARSMUPPATHADAM P.O, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY., PIN - 683110BY ADVS.M.PAUL VARGHESEM.M.MONAYEK.V.SANOSH1ASSESSMENT OFFICER/INCOME TAX OFFICER, ASSESSMENT UNIT,NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTREINCOME TAX DEPARTMENT,MINISTRY OF FINANCE, ROOM NO.401, 2ND FLOOR,E-RAMP, JAWAHARLAL STADIUM, DELHI, PIN - 1100032THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE (NFAC),INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, MINISTRY OF FINANCE,JAWAHARLAL STADIUM, DELHI, PIN - 1100033THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD - 2, TPS, KAP COMMERCIAL COMPLEX, O/O ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ALUVA RANGE, R.S. ROAD, ALUVA , PIN - 6831014PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONAR OF INCOME TAX, KERALA C.R. BUILDING, I.S. PRESS ROAD, KOCHI , PIN - 682018 RESPONDENTS: OTHER PRESENT: ADV. CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM (SC) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON21.12.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J U D G M E N T Petitioner is a Primary Agricultural Credit Society registered under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969. Ext.P1 order of assessment was issued against the petitioner.In the assessment order, petitioner's claim for deduction under Section 80P was rejectedon the ground that there was no evidence to show that petitioner satisfied the ingredientsof the Primary Agricultural Credit Society as contemplated under the Kerala Co-operativeSocieties Act. 2. While assailing the assessment order before the 2[nd] respondent, petitionerhas sought 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 Ext.P2 along withExt.P4 application to condone the delay in filing the appeal and the same is pendingconsideration before the 2[nd] respondent, I deem it fit that this writ petition be disposed ofdirecting the 2[nd] respondent to consider the appeal in a time bound manner. 4.Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 2[nd ]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 this judgment. . 5. Till the disposal of the appeal, no coercive steps shall be initiated against thepetitioner pursuant to Exts.P1. It is made clear that the appellate authority needs to consider the appeal on meritsonly if he decides to condone the delay in filing the appeal. AMG Sd/- GOPINATH P. JUDGE APPENDIX OF WP(C) 41580/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit-P1TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 23.08.2022 FOR THE AY 2020-21 ALONG WITH DEMAND NOTICEFOR THE AY 2020-21 ALONG WITH DEMAND NOTICE Exhibit-P2TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL IN FORM 35 DATED 11.102022DATED 11.102022 Exhibit-P3TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT RECEIPT OF INCOME TAXFORMS DATED 11.10.2022FORMS DATED 11.10.2022 Exhibit-P4TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION TO CONDONE THE DELAY DATED 11.10.202211.10.2022 Exhibit-P5TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FOR STAY DATED 11.10.2022