While Assailing The Assessment Order Before The 3[Rd ]Respondent,Petitioner Has Sought To Canvass That The Judgment Of The Supreme Court Inmavilayi Service Co-O v. Commissioner Ofincome Tax; 2021 (1) Klt 485 Now Governs The Field Thereby Renderingthe Assessment Itself As Incorrect

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. MONDAY, THE 28 DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 7TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944WP(C) NO. 38169 OF 2022 PETITIONER: PEECHI SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO. R 935 PATTIKAD P.O, THRISSUR-680652REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY-IN-CHARGE, PIN - 680652BY ADVS.C.A.JOJOS.JIJI RESPONDENTS: 1THE INCOME TAX OFFICERWARD2 (3), AYAKAR BHAVAN, SAKTHAN STAND, THRISSUR-680001, PIN - 6800012INCOME TAX OFFICERNATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE,NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110001., PIN - 1100013THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( APPEALS)NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE,NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110001., PIN - 110001 OTHER PRESENT: ADV. JOSE JOSEPH (SC) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON28.11.2022, 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 underthe Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969. Ext.P1 order of assessment wasissued against the petitioner. In the assessment order, petitioner's claim fordeduction under Section 80P was rejected on the ground that there was noevidence to show that petitioner satisfied the ingredients of the PrimaryAgricultural Credit Society as contemplated under the Kerala Co-operativeSocieties Act. 2. While assailing the assessment order before the 3[rd ]respondent,petitioner has sought to canvass that the judgment of the Supreme Court inMavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Commissioner ofIncome Tax; 2021 (1) KLT 485 now governs the field thereby renderingthe assessment itself as incorrect. 3.Since the petitioner has already preferred an appeal as Ext.P3and the same is pending consideration before the Income Tax AppellateTribunal (3[rd] respondent), I deem it fit that this writ petition be disposed ofdirecting the Tribunal to consider the appeal in a time bound manner. 4.Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 3[rd] respondent toconsider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P3, as expeditiously aspossible within a period of 2 months from the date of receipt of a copy ofthis judgment.. 5. Till the disposal of the appeal, no coercive steps shall be initiated against the petitioner pursuant to Exts.P1. The writ petition is disposed of as above. TR Sd/- GOPINATH P. JUDGE APPENDIX OF WP(C) 38169/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR AY 2020-21 DATED 23.09.2022 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT ExhibitP2 A TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE FOR AN AMOUNT OF RS.68,06,147/- U/S 156 DATED 23.09.2022 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FOR AY 2021-22BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 20.10.2022 Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FOR AY 2021-22 BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 20.10.2022 Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO.36879 OF 2022 DATED 22.11.2022