While Assailing The Assessment Order Before The 2[Nd] Respondent,Petitioner Has Sought To Canvas That The Judgment Of The Supreme Court Inmavilayi Service Co-Op v. Commissioner Of Incometax; 2021 (1) Klt 485 Now Governs The Field Thereby Rendering The Assessmentitself As Incorrect

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMPRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. WEDNESDAY, THE 16 DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 25TH KARTHIKA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 36616 OF 2022 PETITIONER: THE THRICKODITHANAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITEDTHRICKODITHANAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED NO. 178, THRICKODITHANAM.P.O., CHENGANACHERRY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686105, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. BY ADV O.D.SIVADAS RESPONDENTS: 1NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE & OTHERS NEW DELHI,PIN - 110001, REPRESENTED BY THEPRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER. 2THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), AYAKAR BHAVAN, SASTRI ROAD, KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686001 3THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD (4), THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT,PIN - 689101 BY ADV JOSE JOSEPH, SC, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, KERALA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON16.11.2022, 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 KeralaCo-operative Societies Act, 1969. Ext.P1 order of assessment was issued against thepetitioner. In the assessment order, petitioner's claim for deduction under Section80P was rejected on the ground that there was no evidence to show that petitionersatisfied the ingredients of the Primary Agricultural Credit Society as contemplatedunder the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act. 2. While assailing the assessment order before the 2[nd] respondent,petitioner has sought to canvas that the judgment of the Supreme Court inMavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Commissioner of IncomeTax; 2021 (1) KLT 485 now governs the field thereby rendering the assessmentitself as incorrect. 3.Since the petitioner has already preferred an appeal as Ext.P3 and thesame is pending consideration before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)(2[nd] respondent), I deem it fit that this writ petition be disposed of directing 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 considerand pass appropriate orders on Ext.P3, as expeditiously as possible within a periodof 2 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.. 5. Till the disposal of the appeal, no coercive steps shall be initiatedagainst the petitioner pursuant to Exts.P1. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- GOPINATH P. JUDGE APPENDIX OF WP(C) 36616/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 27.12.2016 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15. ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15. Exhibit P2TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 27.12.2016 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT OF UNDER SECTION 156 OF THE INCOMETAX ACT FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15. THE 3RD RESPONDENT OF UNDER SECTION 156 OF THE INCOMETAX ACT FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15. Exhibit P3TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 25.01.2017 FILED BY THEPETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15. PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15. Exhibit P4TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 14.07.2022 IN WP(C).NO. 22847 2022 RENDERED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT. WP(C).NO. 22847 2022 RENDERED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT.