Wp(C)/12384/2018 Of M/S.ananthapuram Service Co-Operative Society v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF APRIL 2018 / 21ST CHAITHRA, 1940 WP(C).No. 12384 of 2018 PETITIONER(S) M/S.ANANTHAPURAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY REGISTERED AS A PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY UNDER THE KERALA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, AND HAVING ITS HEAD OFFICE AT NO. 28/80, ANANTHAPURAM TOWERS, KAITHAMUKKU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 024 BY ADVS.SRI.KANDAMPULLY RAHUL SMT.RAAGA R.RAMALAKSHMI RESPONDENT(S) 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) INCOME TAX BUILDINGS, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 003. 2. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2 (1), INCOME TAX BUILDINGS, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 003. BY SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11-04-2018,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS NIL /TRUE COPY/ VPS PS TO JUDGE P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J. --------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) Nos. 12384 of 2018 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 11[th] day of April, 2018 JUDGMENT Petitioner was an assessee under the Income Tax Act(the Act) on the rolls of the second respondent. Aggrieved byExt.P3 assessment order, the petitioner preferred Ext.P4 appealbefore the first respondent. Ext.P5 is the application for staypreferred by the petitioner in Ext.P4 appeal. The grievance ofthe petitioner in the writ petition concerns the delay on the partof the first respondent in passing orders on Ext.P5 application forstay. It is alleged by the petitioner in the writ petition thatproceedings have already been initiated for realisation of theamounts covered by Ext.P3 order. The petitioner, therefore,seeks appropriate directions in this regard, in this writ petition. 2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as WPC 12384/18 also the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petitiondirecting the first respondent to take a decision on Ext.P5application for stay, within two months from the date of receiptof a copy of this judgment. Ordered accordingly. Needless to saythat until orders are passed on Ext.P5 application for stay, furtherproceedings for realisation of the amount covered by Ext.P3assessment order shall be deferred. Sd/- vps 12/4 P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE /True Copy/PS to Judge The expression “Ext.P5” occurring in the 4[th] and 7[th]lines of paragraph 1 and 3[rd] and 6[th] lines of the operativeportion of the judgment dated 11/04/2018 in W.P.(C)No.12384/2018 is suo motu corrected as “Ext.P8” as perorder dated 11/04/2018 in W.P.(C) No.12384/2018. Sd/- Registrar (Judicial)