Wp(C)/22916/2017 Of The Porkulam Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF JULY 2017/20TH ASHADHA, 1939 WP(C).No. 22916 of 2017 (L) ---------------------------- PETITIONER : --------------------- THE PORKULAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO:267, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PORKULAM.P.O, PANZHANJI,TRICHUR DISTRICT,PIN-680 542. BY ADV. SRI.M.P.ASHOK KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, INCOME TAX BUILDING,ERNAKULAM. INCOME TAX BUILDING,ERNAKULAM. 2. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, CITY PLAZA, WEST NADA GURUVAYUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 101. R1 & R2 BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11-07-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ---------------------------------------- EXHIBIT P1 PHOTOCOPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 16.12.2016 EXHIBIT P2 PHOTOCOPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 22.12.2016 EXHIBIT P3 PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 05.01.2017. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: ------------------------------------------- NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No.22916 of 2017 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 11[th] day of July, 2017 JUDGMENT The petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved by Ext.P2order of assessment, under the Income Tax Act. In the writpetition, it is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is entitledto a deduction in terms of Section 80 P of the Income Tax Act, andtherefore, there could not have been a confirmation of any demandagainst the petitioner. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and thelearned Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department. 3. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of thecase and the submissions made across the bar, I note from Ext.P2order of assessment that, in the said order, the assessing authoritytakes note of the pendency of a Special Leave Petition filed by theDepartment, against the judgment of this Court in favour of thepetitioner, on the issue of entitlement for deduction under Section80P of the Income Tax Act, and makes it clear that the demandconfirmed against the petitioner will not be enforced until disposalof the Special Leave Petition by the Supreme Court. Taking note ofthe said fact, and finding that there will not be any recovery proceedings initiated against the petitioner pursuant to theassessment order, I dispose the writ petition, leaving it open to thepetitioner to approach the appellate authority under the Income TaxAct, in its challenge against Ext.P2 assessment order. I also find thatExt.P2 order does not suffer from any jurisdictional defect nor is itone that is passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, so asto interfere with the same in these proceedings under Article 226 ofthe Constitution of India. Accordingly, without prejudice to the rightsof the petitioner to approach the appellate authority under the IncomeTax Act, the writ petition in its challenge against Ext.P2 assessmentorder is dismissed. sm/ Sd/- A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE