Wp(C)/21315/2017 Of Mundur Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd v. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3), Thrissur

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF JUNE 2017/7TH ASHADHA, 1939 WP(C).No. 21315 of 2017 (L) ---------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ MUNDUR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. MUNDUR P.O. THRISUR - 680 549 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY SRI.K.P. BABU BY ADVS.SRI.ANIL D. NAIR SRI.R.SREEJITH SRI.P.JINISH PAUL KUM.MEKHALA M.BENNY RESPONDENT: -------------------- INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3), THRISSUR BY SRI. JOSE JOSEPH, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28-06-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ON 28-06-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE sdr/- WP(C).No. 21315 of 2017 (L) ---------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------ EXHIBITP1 TRUE COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 04-11-2016 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM FILED BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BEFORE THE RESPONDENTFOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 EXHIBITP4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.F.NO.AABAM 987 1B DATED 23-05-2017 EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF OFFICE MEMORANDUM (F NO.404/72/93-ITCC) DATED 29-2-2016 DATED 29-2-2016 EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 29-07-2016 IN WPC NO.25262 OF 2016 (G) OF 2016 (G) RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS NIL --------------------------------------- /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C).NO.21315 OF 2017 (L)-----------------------------------Dated this the 28[th] day of June, 2017 J U D G M E N T The petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved by Ext.P4conditional order of stay passed under Section 220(6) of the IncomeTax Act. It is the case of the petitioner that, against the assessmentorder, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P2 appeal before the additional2[nd] respondent, and the issue, which is the subject matter of theappeal, stands covered in favour of the petitioner by the decisiondated 15.2.2016 of this Court in I.T.A.No.212/2013. It is stated thatduring the pendency of the appeal before the additional 2[nd]respondent, when the petitioner was confronted with recovery steps,he had approached the 1[st] respondent through an application underSection 220(6), and the 1[st] respondent, instead of granting anunconditional stay, directed the petitioner to pay 15% of the amountconfirmed against the petitioner by the assessment order, as acondition for grant of stay against recovery of the balance amounts,pending disposal of the appeal by the additional 2[nd] respondent. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as alsothe learned Standing counsel for the respondents. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as alsothe learned Standing counsel for the respondents. 3. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the caseas also the submissions made across the bar, and taking note of thefact that the issue involved in the appeal before the additional 2[nd]respondent stands covered in favour of the petitioner by the decisionof this Court referred above, I quash Ext.P4 order, to the extent, itimposes a condition of payment of 15% of the tax liability as acondition for stay of recovery pending disposal of the appeal by theadditional 2[nd] respondent. I further make it clear that the 2[nd]respondent shall pass orders in the appeal, after hearing thepetitioner, and till such time as orders are passed by the additional 2[nd]respondent, as directed, and communicated to the petitioner, recoverysteps for recovery of amounts confirmed against the petitioner by theassessment order shall be kept in abeyance. The writ petition is disposed as above. prp/29/6/17 A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE