Wp(C)/18608/2020 Of The Kollad Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)
High Court
11 Sep 2020 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Wp(C)/18608/2020 Of The Kollad Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)
Date of order
11 Sep 2020
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Wp(C)/18608/2020 Of The Kollad Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals), the High Court (2020) decided the matter.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
FRIDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2020 / 20TH BHADRA, 1942
WP(C).No.18608 OF 2020(A)
PETITIONER:
THE KOLLAD SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANKLTD.NO.1830,KOLLAD P.O.,KOTTAYAM DISTRICT,REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY
BY ADV. SRI.O.D.SIVADAS
RESPONDENTS:
1THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS),AYAKAR BHAVAN,KOTTAYAM PIN 686 001.
2THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD NO.2,KOTTAYAM PIN 686 001.
BY SRI JOSE JOSEPH, SC FOR INCOME TAX
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON11.09.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 11[th] day of September, 2020
The petitioner is a Co-operative bank. The petitioner
furnished income tax returns for the assessment year 1919-
2020 and claimed the benefit under Section 80P(4) of theIncome Tax Act. The Assessing Authority completed theassessment and demanded a tax of `66,38,680/- bydisallowing claim for deduction under Section 80P(2) of theIncome Tax Act.
2.The petitioner has filed Ext.P2 appeal before theCommissioner of Income Tax Appeals, Kottayam. Pendingthe appeal, coercive steps are being taken against thepetitioner, contends the learned counsel for the petitioner.3.Heard.
4.The statutory appeal filed by the petitioner ispending. Before considering the same on merits if coercivesteps are taken against the petitioner, the petitioner will be
put to untold difficulties.
In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed ofdirecting the first respondent to consider Ext.P2 appeal filedby the petitioner on merits and pass appropriate ordersthereon. Till Ext.P2 is considered and disposed of, therespondents are restrained from taking coercive actionagainst the petitioner. The appeal shall be considered anddisposed of within a period of six months.
ncd
Sd/-
N. NAGARESH
JUDGE
APPENDIX
EXHIBIT P1TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDING 13.07.2020N ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P2TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 22.08.2020FILED BY THE PETITIONER SOCIETY BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.