While Assailing The Assessment Order Beforethe 2[Nd] Respondent, Petitioner Relied On The Judgmentof The Supreme Court Inmavilayi Servicecooperative Bank Ltd v. Commissioner Ofincome Tax; 2021 (1) Klt 485 To Submit That Theassessment Itself Is Incorrect

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI THURSDAY, THE 23 DAY OF FEBRUARY 2023 / 4TH PHALGUNA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 6222 OF 2023 PETITIONER: 1THE ANICKAD REGIONAL FARMER'S SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED AGED 55 YEARSNO.3867, PALLICKATHODU, ANICKAD P.O., KOTTAYAM, PIN – 686503REPRESENTED BY ITS THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,BY ADV O.D.SIVADAS RESPONDENTS: 1THE NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, NEW DELHI, PIN – 110001REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER2THE ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME TAX OFFICER, NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NEW DELHI, PIN - 1100013THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, AYKAR BHAVAN, KOTTAYM,, PIN - 686001BY ADV JOSE JOSEPH, SC, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, KERALA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23.02.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. RAVI, J. ------------------------------------ W.P.(C.) No.6222 of 2023------------------------------------ Dated this the 23[rd] day of February, 2023JUDGMENT Petitioner is a Primary Agricultural Credit Societyregistered under the Kerala Co-operative SocietiesAct, 1969. Ext.P1 order of assessment was issuedagainst the petitioner. In the assessment order,petitioner's claim for deduction under Section 80P wasrejected on the ground that there was no evidence toshow that petitioner satisfied the ingredients of thePrimary Agricultural Credit Society as contemplatedunder the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act. 2. While assailing the assessment order beforethe 2[nd] respondent, petitioner relied on the judgmentof the Supreme Court inMavilayi ServiceCooperative Bank Ltd. v. Commissioner ofIncome Tax; 2021 (1) KLT 485 to submit that theassessment itself is incorrect. WPC No.6222 of 2023 3. Since the petitioner has already preferred an appeal as Ext.P2 and the same is pendingconsideration before the 1[st] respondent, I deem it fitthat this writ petition be disposed of directing the 1[st]respondent to consider the appeal in a time boundmanner. 4. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 1[st] respondent to consider and pass appropriate orderson Ext.P2, as expeditiously as possible within a periodof 2 months from the date of receipt of a copy of thisjudgment. 5. Till the disposal of the appeal, no coercivesteps shall be initiated against the petitioner pursuantto Ext.P1. SKP/23-02 Sd/- T.R.RAVI JUDGE WPC No.6222 of 2023 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 6222/2023 PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS:EXHIBIT P1TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE2ND RESPONDENT WITH COMPUTATION SHEET DATED 06/09/2022 EXHIBIT P2TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 31/1/2023RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:NIL TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE