Wp(C)/15767/2019 Of Nadakkal Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd v. Income Tax Officer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN MONDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF JUNE 2019 / 20TH JYAISHTA, 1941WP(C).No. 15767 of 2019 PETITIONER/S: M/S NADAKKAL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.KALLUVATHUKKAL P.O, KOLLAM-691 578, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. BY ADVS.SRI.C.A.JOJOSMT.SWATHY S.SRI.JACOB CHACKOSRI.MATHEWS JOSEPH RESPONDENT/S: 1INCOME TAX OFFICERWARD-4, KOLLAM, AYAKAR BHAVAN, KOLLAM-691 001 2COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-1,OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), TRIVANDRUM-695 003 OTHER PRESENT: CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, SC, INCOME TAX THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10.06.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT Petitioner is a Co-operative Society which has been issuedwith assessment order under the Income Tax Act. Beingaggrieved by the assessment order, the petitioner has preferredstatutory appeal, Exhibit P3, before the 2[nd] respondent appellateauthority under the Income Tax Act. He has also preferredExhibit P6 stay petition in the appeal. However, it is contendedthat demands are being raised in terms of the assessmentorders. 2. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned standing counsel appearing for therespondents, I am of the opinion that the appeal preferred bythe petitioner institution is liable to be considered and disposedof on merits before proceeding with the recovery of amounts interms of the orders passed by the assessment authority. In the above view of the matter, I am of the opinion thatExt.P3 appeal is to be considered and reasoned order is to bepassed at least on the application preferred by the petitioner forstay before any further coercive proceedings are taken againstthe petitioner. The 2[nd] respondent is directed to consider and WP(C).No. 15767 of 2019 3 pass orders either on Ext.P3 appeal or a reasoned order on theapplication preferred by the petitioner for stay after hearing thepetitioner and after considering the legal contentions raised. Tillorders are passed as directed above, the demand raised againstthe petitioner shall be kept in abeyance. The writ petition is ordered accordingly. Sd/- ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE rmm APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AY 2015-16 DATED 28.12.2018 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT.2015-16 DATED 28.12.2018 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE FOR ANAMOUNT OF RS. 1,16,40,620/- U/S. 156 DATED 28.12.2019 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT.AMOUNT OF RS. 1,16,40,620/- U/S. 156 DATED 28.12.2019 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 24.01.2019 FILED FOR AY 2015-162ND RESPONDENT DATED 24.01.2019 FILED FOR AY 2015-16 EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO. 8133/2019 DATED 18.03.2019.NO. 8133/2019 DATED 18.03.2019. EXHIBIT P5A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO. 25262/2016 DATED 07.04.2017.NO. 25262/2016 DATED 07.04.2017. EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 21.03.2019 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.21.03.2019 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND LETTER ISSUEDBY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 22.05.2019.BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 22.05.2019. RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS NIL // TRUE COPY // PA. TO JUDGE