Wp(C)/27327/2019 Of The Chavassery Service Co-Operative Bank C-39 v. The Income Tax Officer
High Court
15 Oct 2019 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Wp(C)/27327/2019 Of The Chavassery Service Co-Operative Bank C-39 v. The Income Tax Officer
Date of order
15 Oct 2019
Assessment year(s)
2016-2017, 2016-17
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Wp(C)/27327/2019 Of The Chavassery Service Co-Operative Bank C-39 v. The Income Tax Officer, the High Court (2019) 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 A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
TUESDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 / 23RD ASWINA, 1941
WP(C).No.27327 OF 2019
PETITIONER:
THE CHAVASSERY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK C-39,P.O.CHAVASSERY, MATTANUR VIA, KANNUR-670702, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY SATHEESH CHANDRAN K.P.BY ADVS.SRI.S.ARUN RAJSMT.C.T.SUJASRI.ARJUN S.RAJ
RESPONDENTS:
BY ADV.SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON15.10.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
J U D G M E N T
Against Ext.P1 assessment order under the Income Tax Act forthe assessment year 2016-2017, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P2appeal together with Ext.P3 stay petition before the 3[rd] respondent.It is the case of the petitioner that even prior to considering the staypetition, recovery steps are taken by the respondents against thepetitioner for recovery of the amounts confirmed by Ext.P1assessment order.
2. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitionerand also the learned Standing counsel appearing for the respondents.
On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the caseas also the submissions made across the Bar, I dispose the writpetition with the following directions:
1. The 3[rd] respondent shall consider and passreasoned orders on Ext.P3 stay petition within aperiod of six weeks from the date of receipt of acopy of this judgment, after hearing thepetitioner.
2. Recovery steps for recovery of amountsconfirmed against the petitioner by Ext.P1assessment order shall be kept in abeyance tillsuch time as orders are passed by the 3[rd]respondent as directed above and communicatedto the petitioner.
3. The petitioner shall produce a copy of thewrit petition together with a copy of thisjudgment, before the 3[rd] respondent, for furtheraction.
Sd/-
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE
APPENDIX
PETITIONERS EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT -P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 24.12.2018PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE ACT FOR THEAY 2016-17
EXHIBIT P2- TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONERBEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2016-17
EXHIBIT P3- TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION OF STAY FILED BY THEPETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2016-17
RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.A TO JUDGE
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.