Wp(C)/2334/2020 Of The Nedungolam Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)
High Court
28 Jan 2020 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Wp(C)/2334/2020 Of The Nedungolam Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)
Date of order
28 Jan 2020
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Wp(C)/2334/2020 Of The Nedungolam Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), the High Court (2020) decided the matter.
Decision: With these observations and directions, the above Writ Petition(Civil) stands finally disposed of.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS
TUESDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF JANUARY 2020 / 8TH MAGHA, 1941
WP(C).No.2334 OF 2020(N)
PETITIONER:
THE NEDUNGOLAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO. 583REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, CHATHANOOR, NEDUNGOLAM P.O., KOLLAM-671334.
BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN
RESPONDENTS:
1THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
2THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,TAX OFFICER, WARD NO.4, KOLLAM-691001.
WARD 4, KOLLAM (ASSESSING OFFICER), O/O THE INCOME
SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON28.01.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.
===========================
W.P(C) No.2334 of 2020
===========================
Dated this the 28th day of January 2020
JUDGMENT
Against Ext.P2 assessment order, the petitioner has filed Ext.P4appeal and Ext.P5 stay petition. The petitioner's grievance is that duringthe pendency of the stay petition, coercive recovery proceedings have beeninitiated by the assessing authority for recovery of the disputed amounts.
2.Heard Sri.P.C.Sasidharan, learned counsel appearing for thepetitioner and Sri. Christopher Abraham, learned standing counselappearing for the respondents.
3.After hearing both sides and after taking note of the facts andcircumstances of the case, it is ordered in the interest of justice that the 1[st]respondent shall take up the matters in Ext.P5 stay application filed inExt.P4 appeal and after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard tothe petitioner through their authorised representative/counsel, if any, shallpass orders on those applications without much delay, preferably within aperiod of 2 months from the date of production of a certified copy of thisjudgment. Until orders are thus passed on the abovesaid stay application,further coercive steps for enforcement of the impugned order will be keptin abeyance.
With these observations and directions, the above Writ Petition(Civil) stands finally disposed of.
Nsd//true copy//Pa to Judge
Sd/-
ALEXANDER THOMAS
JUDGE
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1
TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE DATED 26.11.2018.
EXHIBIT P2
TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 07.12.2019.
EXHIBIT P3
TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 07.12.2019.
EXHIBIT P4EXHIBIT P5
TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 06.01.2020.TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 15.01.2020.
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.