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 Of Incometax; 2021 (1) Klt 485 Now Governs The Field Thereby Rendering The Assessmentitself As Incorrect

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. FRIDAY, THE 12 DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 21ST SRAVANA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 25954 OF 2022 PETITIONER: THE SOORANAD FARMERS SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO 1136VAYANASALA JUNCTION, SOORANADU P.O, KOLLAM- REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY THUSHANTH V, PIN - 690522BY ADVS.K.P.PRADEEPHAREESH M.R.SANAND RAMAKRISHNANT.T.BIJUT.THASMIM.J.ANOOPASANU S MALAKEEL RESPONDENTS: 1THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MINISTRY OF FINANCEGOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NORTH BLOCK NEW DELHI- , REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN , PIN - 1100012ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXINCOME TAX OFFICER,NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI ROOM NO. 401, 2ND FLOOR, E-RAMP,JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM, DELHI, PIN - 1100033COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE (NFAC), DELHI, ROOM NO.401, 2ND FLOOR, E-RAMP,JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM, DELHI, PIN - 110003 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON12.08.2022, 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 on 23-04-2021. In the assessment order, petitioner's claim for deductionunder Section 80P was rejected on the ground that there was no evidence to showthat 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 3[rd ]respondent,petitioner has sought to canvass 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.P2 and thesame is pending consideration before 3[rd] respondent, I deem it fit that this writpetition be disposed of directing the 3[rd] respondent to consider the appeal in a timebound manner. 4.Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 3[rd] respondent to considerand pass appropriate orders on Ext.P2, as expeditiously as possible within a periodof 2 months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of a 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) 25954/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO ITBA/AST/S/144/2021-22/1032624506(1) DATED 23-04-2021ISSUED FOR THE YEAR 2018-19 BY THE 2NDRESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONERITBA/AST/S/144/2021-22/1032624506(1) DATED 23-04-2021ISSUED FOR THE YEAR 2018-19 BY THE 2NDRESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER Exhibit P2TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 30-08-2021 FILED FOR THE YEAR 2018-19 BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONERTHE YEAR 2018-19 BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER Exhibit P3TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE ITBA/AST/S/156/2021-22/1032624514(1) DATED 23-04-2021 ISSUED FOR THE YEAR2018-19BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT22/1032624514(1) DATED 23-04-2021 ISSUED FOR THE YEAR2018-19BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P4TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 23-02-2022 IN WPC NO 6109 OF 20226109 OF 2022