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. TUESDAY, THE 1 DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 10TH KARTHIKA, 1944WP(C) NO. 34741 OF 2022 PETITIONER: BALARAMAPURAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD, NO T-14BP 7/623, VIZHINJAM ROAD BALARAMAPURAM P.OTHIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695501REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY A. JAFFER KHAN BY 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, PIN - 110001 , REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN2ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXINCOME TAX OFFICER,NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI ROOM NO. 401, 2ND FLOOR, E-RAMP, PIN - 110003JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM, DELHI3COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE (NFAC), DELHI, ROOM NO.401, 2ND FLOOR, E-RAMP,JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM, DELHI, PIN – 110003. OTHER PRESENT: ADV.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM (SC) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON01.11.2022, 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 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 the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (3[rd]respondent), I deem it fit that this writ petition be disposed of directing theTribunal to consider the appeal in a time bound 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 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) 34741/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO ITBA/AST/S/143(3)/2022-23/1045902393(1) DATED 23-09-2022 ISSUED FOR THE YEAR 2020-21 BY THE 2NDRESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONERITBA/AST/S/143(3)/2022-23/1045902393(1) DATED 23-09-2022 ISSUED FOR THE YEAR 2020-21 BY THE 2NDRESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER Exhibit P2TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 03-10-2022 FILED FOR THEYEAR 2020-21 BEFORE THE 3RDRESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONERYEAR 2020-21 BEFORE THE 3RDRESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER Exhibit P3TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE ITBA/AST/S/156/2022-23/1045902409(1) DATED 23-09-2022 ISSUED FOR THE YEAR 2020-21 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT23/1045902409(1) DATED 23-09-2022 ISSUED FOR THE YEAR 2020-21 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P4TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 23-02-2022 IN WPC NO 6109 OF 20226109 OF 2022