While Assailing The Assessment Order Beforethe 2[Nd]Respondent, Petitioner Has Sought To Canvassthat The Judgment Of The Supreme Court In Mavilayiservice Co-Ope v. Commissionerof Income Tax; 2021 (1) Klt 485 Now Governs Thefield Thereby Rendering The Assessment Itself Asincorrect

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. TUESDAY, THE 29 DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 8TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 38278 OF 2022 PETITIONER: THE NADATHARA FARMERS SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.3499AGED 54 YEARSNADATHARA P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT,REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR-IN-CHARGE., PIN - 680751BY ADVS.M.SASINDRANSREEHARI INDUKALADHARAN RESPONDENTS: 1THE INCOME TAX OFFICERAAYAKAR BHAVAN, MUNICIPAL OFFICE ROADTHRISSUR, KERALA, PIN - 6800012THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)NATIONAL FACELESS APPEALS CENTRE (NFAC) NEW DELHI., PIN - 110001BY ADV JOSE JOSEPH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON29.11.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT Dated this the 29[th] day of November, 2022 Petitioner is a Primary Agricultural Credit Societyregistered under the Kerala Co-operative SocietiesAct, 1969. Ext.P2 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 has sought to canvassthat the judgment of the Supreme Court in MavilayiService Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Commissionerof Income Tax; 2021 (1) KLT 485 now governs thefield thereby rendering the assessment itself asincorrect. 3. Since the petitioner has already preferred an W.P. (C) No. 38278 of 2022 ..3.. appeal as Ext.P4 and the same is pending consideration before the Income Tax AppellateTribunal (2nd respondent), I deem it fit that this writpetition be disposed of directing the Tribunal toconsider the appeal in a time bound manner. 4. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider and pass appropriate orderson Ext.P4 appeal, as expeditiously as possible within aperiod of 2 months from the date of receipt of a copyof this judgment. 5. Till the disposal of the appeal, no coercive steps shall be initiated against the petitioner pursuantto Ext.P2 order of assessment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- GOPINATH P. JUDGE W.P. (C) No. 38278 of 2022 ..4.. APPENDIX OF WP(C) 38278/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITSExhibit P1 Exhibit P1A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION DATED30-12-2016 ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, THRISSUR Exhibit P2A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2020-2021 DATED 23.09.2022 Exhibit P3A TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE Exhibit P3A TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE NO.ITBA/AST/S/156/2022-23/1045879350(1) DATED 23.09.2022 Exhibit P4A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 21.10.2022 Exhibit P4(a)A TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 21.10.2022 Exhibit P5A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 19.07.2019 IN W.A.NO.1639/2019 RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:NIL TRUE COPY P.A.TO JUDGE