Wp(C)/26234/2015 Of Government Service Co Operative Bank Limited v. The Income Tax Officer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF AUGUST 2015/3RD BHADRA, 1937 WP(C).No. 26234 of 2015 (D) ---------------------------- PETITIONER : ----------------------- THE GOVERNMENT SERVANTS CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED., NO.235, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY MR.P.M.PRAVEEN, AGED 55 YEARS, S/O.N.MADHAVAN, CHANDRAKANTHAM, PATTANAKKAD.P.O., CHERTHALA,PIN-688 524. BY ADVS.SRI.C.A.JOJO SRI.JACOB CHACKO RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD NO.5, OFFICE OF THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD NO.5, DEVASWOM BUILDING ALAPPUZHA-688 011. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), 1ST FLOOR, KOTTAYAM PUBLIC LIBRARY BUILDING, SASTHRI ROAD, KOTTAYAM-686 001 1ST FLOOR, KOTTAYAM PUBLIC LIBRARY BUILDING, SASTHRI ROAD, KOTTAYAM-686 001 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.M.SANEER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25-08-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).NO.26234/2015 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 26/03/2015 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.RESPONDENT. P2COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 24/04/2015 BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT2ND RESPONDENT P3COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 24/04/2015 BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT2ND RESPONDENT P4COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 07/08/2015 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT P5COPY OF THE DEMAND LETTER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 21/08/201521/08/2015 P6COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C).NO.10113 OF 2015 DATED 10/04/2015. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C).NO.26234 OF 2015 -----------------------------------Dated this the 25[th] day of August, 2015 J U D G M E N T Against Ext.P1 assessment order passed under the Income TaxAct, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P2 appeal before the 2[nd]respondent. In the writ petition, it is the specific case of the petitionerthat although the petitioner had preferred a stay petition along withExt.P2 appeal before the 2[nd] respondent, the 2[nd] respondent refused toconsider the stay petition on merits stating that there was noprovision under the Income Tax Act or rules which enabled the 2[nd]respondent to pass orders on the stay petition. It is under thesecircumstances that, left with no other remedy, the petitioner hasapproached this Court when confronted with Ext.P5 demand noticeseeking recovery of the amounts confirmed against the petitioner byExt.P1 assessment order. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and thelearned Standing counsel for the respondents. 3. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the caseas also the submissions made across the Bar, I dispose the writpetition with a direction to the 2[nd] respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P2 appeal within a period of two months from the dateof receipt of a copy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner. Imake it clear that, till such time as orders are passed by the 2[nd]respondent as directed and communicated to the petitioner, coercivesteps pursuant to Ext.P5 demand notice for recovery of amountsconfirmed against the petitioner by Ext.P1 assessment order shall bekept in abeyance. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE mns