Wp(C)/27437/2019 Of The Mayyanad Regional Co-Operative Bank Limited v. The Income Tax Appellate Authority

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2019/24TH ASWINA, 1941 W.P(C).No.27437 OF 2019(D) PETITIONER: THE MAYYANAD REGIONAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITEDMAYYANAD BANK BUILDING, MAYYANAD, KOLLAM-691303, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE BY ADVS.SRI.V.JAYAPRADEEPSMT.ANN SUSAN GEORGESMT.O.A.NURIYASRI.D.S.LOKANATHANSRI.ALAN PRIYADARSHI DEV RESPONDENTS: 1THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE AUTHORITY(THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695003 2INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD NO.4RAILWAY STATION ROAD, KARABALA JUNCTION, KOLLAM-691001BY SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, SC, IT DEPARTMENT THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FORADMISSION ON 16.10.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAYDELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J U D G M E N T Against Exts.P2 and P3 assessment orders under the IncomeTax Act, for the assessment years 2014-15 and 2016-17, thepetitioner has preferred appeals before the First Appellate Authority,but the same were dismissed by Exts.P4 and P5 orders. Immediatelythereafter, Ext.P6 demand notice was served on the petitioner forrecovery of the amounts confirmed against the petitioner by theAppellate Authority. The limited prayer of the petitioner is for adirection to the respondents to refrain from pursuing recovery stepstill such time as the petitioner prefers an appeal and stay petitionbefore the Appellate Tribunal as permitted by the Statute. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as alsothe learned Standing counsel for the respondents. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the caseas also the submissions made across the bar, I direct that if thepetitioner prefers an appeal along with a stay petition before the Appellate Tribunal within one month from today, then the AppellateTribunal shall proceed to consider the stay application preferred bythe petitioner within a further period of two months from the date ofreceipt of the application from the petitioner. I make it clear thatrecovery steps, pursuant to Ext.P6 demand notice, shall be kept inabeyance till such time as the Appellate Tribunal considers andpasses orders on the stay petition to be preferred by the petitionerand the said order is communicated to the petitioner. It is made clearthat if the petitioner does not file the appeal and stay petition withinthe time granted in this judgment, he will lose the benefit of thisjudgment. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petitiontogether with a copy of this judgment, before the respondents andthe Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, for further action. Sd/-A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE prp/15/10/19 W.P.(C).No.27437/2019 : 4 : APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE REGISTRAR, CO-OPERATIVESOCIETIES DATED 12.02.1957. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 29.12.2016 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR2014-15. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DTD. 26.12.2018 FOR THE ASSESSMENTYEAR 2016-17. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE APPEAL ORDER DATED 05.09.2019 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE APPEAL ORDER DATED 05.09.2019 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR2016-17. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DTD. 01.10.2019. EXT.P7: COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL DATED 03.09.2018 IN ITANO.98/COCH/2017. RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE