Wp/11161/2020 Of Kanaka Mahila Pathina Sahakara Sangha Niyamitha v. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)

NTHE|IGHCOURTOFEKARNATAKA|ATBENGALURU DATED THISTHE|16 DAYOFEOCTOBER2020 BO EFO TELEHON>BLEMRJUSTICEB.MiSHYAW|p WRITPETITIONNO11161/2020(T/IT) BETWEEN! KANAKA MAHILA PATHINA |SAHAKARA SANGHA NIYAMITHA,OPPOSITE LIC OFFICE, |VIJAYANAGARA EXTENSION ROAD, |HOSADURGA,CHITRADURGA DISTRICT - 5777527REP, BY ITS SECRETARY SMT. SHANTHA J.B. —. PETITIONBR| (BY SRI. MAHESH R.UPPIN., ADVOCATE) AND|! 1.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS),SHREE TOWERS,HADADI MAIN ROAD,OPP: D. R. R. HOSPITAL,DAVANGERE - 577002.SHREE TOWERS,HADADI MAIN ROAD,OPP: D. R. R. HOSPITAL,DAVANGERE - 577002. oOINCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD - 1 SHREE TOWERS,HADADI MAIN ROAD,OPP. D.R.R. HOSPITAL, |DAVANGERE - 577002.)WARD - 1 SHREE TOWERS,HADADI MAIN ROAD,OPP. D.R.R. HOSPITAL, |DAVANGERE - 577002.) 3.INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-I,AAYAKAR BHAVAN,AAYAKAR BHAVAN, TAMATKAL ROAD, MEDEHALLY,CHITRADURGA — 577502. .. RESPONDENTS. (BY SRI. JEEVAN J.NEERALGI, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION [IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND22/ OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE|ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 10.12.2019 PASSED BY THE R-2.MARKED AS ANNEXURE-A AND THE NOTICHKH DATED 6.03.202ISSUBD BY THR RESPONDENT MARKBD AS ANNBXURE-B OR IN.THE ALTERNATIVE, DIRECT THE R-1 TO DISPOSE OF THE|APPEALANNE XURE-CDATED28.01.2020|BEARINGACKNOWLEDGEMENT NO.297051391280120 FILED BY THE.PRHTITIONBR WITHIN A PBHRIOD OF TWO MONTHS AND TILL THDISPOSAL OF THE SAID APPEAL, NOT TO MAKE ANY DEMAND|OF INCOME TAX FROM THE PETITIONER. THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY|HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER The petitioner has impugned the assessment order|dated 10.12.2019 and the subsequent demand notice dated6.3.2020. The question canvassed by the petitioner is,whether the Authorities are justified in denying the petitioner|the benefit that would be available under Section SOP oft theIncome Tax Act, 1961. | ?)The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitsthat this Court in similar circumstances has directed the first.respondent to expeditiously consider the petitioner’s appealwithout insistence on statutory pre-deposit. The learned|Counsel for the petitioner in this regard relies upon the orderotthisCourtdated28.01.2020|inWrit.PetitionNo.18/79/2020. — 3,It|1Suncontroverted thatthequestionforconsideration as canvassed in this petition is the same as inthe earlier writ petition in Writ Petition No.1879/2020, andthe order dated 28.01.2020 is also perused. The petition isallowed calling upon the first respondent to dispose of the)petitioner’s appeal expeditiously without insisting upon thestatutory pre-deposit. AN/-. SD/- JUDGE