Wp(C)/11364/2015 Of M/S. Society For Rural Improvement v. The Income Tax Officer (Exemption)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF APRIL 2015/17TH CHAITHRA, 1937 WP(C).No. 11364 of 2015 (U) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- M/S. SOCIETY FOR RURAL IMPROVEMENT, SRIMOORTHY NAGAR, NEAR CHINMAYA MISSION, KOLLENGODE, PALAKKAD-678 506, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER DR.PRABHAKARAN. BY SRI.T.M.SREEDHARAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE. ADVS. SRI.V.P.NARAYANAN, SMT.DIVYA RAVINDRAN. RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), AYYAKKAR BHAVAN, S.T. NAGAR, THRISSUR-680 001. AYYAKKAR BHAVAN, S.T. NAGAR, THRISSUR-680 001. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-V, 7TH FLOOR, KERA BHAVAN, SRV H.S. ROAD, COCHIN-682 011. 7TH FLOOR, KERA BHAVAN, SRV H.S. ROAD, COCHIN-682 011. BY ADV. SRI.K.M.V.PANDALAI, SC. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07-04-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- EXT.P1COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S. 143(3) OF THE ACT DATED 12/03/2015 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P2COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 18/03/2015FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.EXT.P3COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 18/03/2015 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.EXT.P4COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNDER 2006(6) ON 18/03/2015.BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNDER 2006(6) ON 18/03/2015. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J. =========================================== W.P.(C). No. 11364 of 2015 ===================================================== Dated this the 7[th] day of April, 2015 JUDGMENT The Petitioner is an assessee under the Income Tax Act,1961. Against Ext.P1 assessment order passed under the IT Act,the petitioner preferred Ext.P2 appeal and Ext.P3 stay petitionbefore the 2[nd] respondent. The grievance of the petitioner is thateven before considering the stay petition, the respondents aretaking steps to recover the amounts confirmed against thepetitioner by Ext.P1 order. 2.I have heard the learned counsel appearing for thepetitioner as also the learned Government Pleader appearing forthe respondents. 3.On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of thecase and the submissions made across the bar, I dispose the writpetition with a direction to the 2[nd] respondent to consider and passorders on Ext.P3 stay petition, preferred by the petitioner beforehim, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of acopy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner. The recoverysteps for recovery of amounts confirmed against the petitioner byExt.P1 order, shall be kept in abeyance till such time as the 2[nd] W.P.(C). No. 11364 of 2015 respondent passes orders, as directed, in Ext.P3 stay petition andcommunicates the same to the petitioner. Sd/-A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE das