Wp(C)/10405/2019 Of Kanippayur Service Co-Operative Bank Limited v. The Income Tax Officer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMPRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI WEDNESDAY,THE 03RD DAY OF APRIL 2019 / 13TH CHAITHRA, 1941 WP(C).No. 10405 of 2019 PETITIONER/S: KANIPPAYUR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED NO. 280REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY PARAMESWARAN, AGED 57 YEARS, W/O VISWESARAN, KANIPPAYUR P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680 517 BY ADVS.SRI.C.A.JOJOSRI.JACOB CHACKOSRI.MATHEWS JOSEPH RESPONDENT/S: WARD-1, CITY PLAZA, WESTNADA, GURUVAYUR, THRISSUR, SC SRI. CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.04.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT The petitioner, a Co-operative Bank filed appeal against the order of assessment for the year 2013-2014 before the 2[nd]respondent. The petitioner moved the 2[nd] respondent by filingExt.P3 appeal together with stay petition. The 2[nd] respondent videorder Ext.P4 granted stay but imposed the condition of depositing30% of the demand. Apparently, the petitioner has not compliedwith the condition imposed in Ext.P4. 2. Having regard to the non compliance with the condition incorporated in Ext.P4, Ext.P8 notice under Section 221(1) dated21.03.2019 is issued by the 1[st] respondent, hence the writ petition.The petitioner in effect has framed the writ prayers in such a waythat not withstanding the default in complying with the conditionimposed by Ext.P4 order this Court considers and examines thechallenge made to Ext.P8 and further directs disposing of Ext.P3appeal. 3. The prayers though made carefully the intention of theseprayers are easily demonstrated by Mr.Christopher Abraham. Hissimple objection is that there is no challenge to Ext.P4. This Court adverts and exercise the discretion keeping in mind the orderalready passed by the Commissioner of Appeal-2[nd] respondent. Inthe circumstances of this case he contends that no direction couldbe issued by this Court even for disposing of Ext.P3 appeal. Healternatively submits that the statutory appeal since is animportant legal remedy this court can exercise its discretion to putthe petitioner to the condition of 20% either for stay or for directing2[nd] respondent to dispose of the appeal. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner fairly draws theattention of the court to the view taken by a Division Bench of DelhiHigh Court in W.P.(C)No.682/2019 & CM Appl.3018/2019 and saysthat some reasonable time could be considered by this Court fordepositing 20% and appropriate directions are issued for disposingof the appeals. Having regard to above submission the writ petitionis disposed of by this order:- (a) there shall be stay of recovery of tax determined for theassessment year 2013-2014 subject to the petitioner depositing 10%of the tax demanded within six weeks from today and another 10%within six weeks thereafter. The petitioner continues to enjoy the W.P.(C)No.10405/2019 4 protection granted by this Court subject to complying with thecondition imposed by the order. In default without reference tocourt the stay shall be deemed to have been vacated. The 2[nd]respondent considers and disposes of appeal as expeditiously aspossible preferably within six months from the date of receipt of acopy of this order. Sd/- S.V.BHATTI JUDGE Ac W.P.(C)No.10405/2019 5 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 17-03-2016 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT17-03-2016 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 17-03-2016 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT03-2016 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P3A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FOR AY 2013-14 DATED 13-04-2016 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENTDATED 13-04-2016 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT Sd/- S.V.BHATTI JUDGE Ac W.P.(C)No.10405/2019 5 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 17-03-2016 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT17-03-2016 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 17-03-2016 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT03-2016 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P3A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FOR AY 2013-14 DATED 13-04-2016 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENTDATED 13-04-2016 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P4A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 24-05-2017 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENTISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P5A TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 08-02-2018 BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT2018 BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P6A TRUE COPY OF THE REVIEW PETITION DATED 09.06.2017 FILED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT09.06.2017 FILED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P7A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ON REVIEW PETITION BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 25-06-2018PETITION BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 25-06-2018 EXHIBIT P8A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE U/S 221(1) DATED21-03-2019 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT21-03-2019 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS : NIL //TRUE COPY// Sd/- PA TO JUDGE