Wp(C)/28267/2019 Of The Pidavoor Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd v. The Income Tax Officer
High Court
24 Oct 2019 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Wp(C)/28267/2019 Of The Pidavoor Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd v. The Income Tax Officer
Date of order
24 Oct 2019
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Wp(C)/28267/2019 Of The Pidavoor Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd 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
THURSDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 / 2ND KARTHIKA, 1941
WP(C).No.28267 OF 2019(G)
PETITIONER:
THE PIDAVOOR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.2807REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PIDAVOOR P.O, PATHANAPURAM, KOLLAM DISTRICT 689 695
RESPONDENTS:
BY ADV.SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM,SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON24.10.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.28267 OF 2019(G)
J U D G M E N T
Against Ext.P3 rectified order under the Income Tax Act, thepetitioner has preferred Ext.P4 appeal together with Ext.P5 stay petitionbefore the 3[rd] respondent. It is the case of the petitioner that even priorto considering the stay petition, recovery steps are taken by therespondents against the petitioner for recovery of the amountsconfirmed by Ext.P3 rectified 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 case asalso the submissions made across the Bar, I dispose the writ petition withthe following directions:
1. The 3[rd] respondent shall consider and passreasoned orders on Ext.P5 stay petition within aperiod of two months from the date of receipt of acopy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner.
2. Recovery steps for recovery of amountsconfirmed against the petitioner by Ext.P3 rectifiedorder shall be kept in abeyance till such time asorders are passed by the 3[rd] respondent as directedabove and communicated to the petitioner.
mns
3. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the writpetition together with a copy of this judgment,before the 3[rd] respondent, for further action.
Sd/-
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
APPENDIX
EXHIBIT P1A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2015-2016 DATED 15-12-2017
EXHIBIT P2A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 17-12-2018 IN ITA NO. 211/EF/KLM/CIT(A)/TVM/2017-18 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENTEXHIBIT P3A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 03-09-2019 IN ITA NNO. 211/EF/KLM/CIT(A)/TVM/2017-18 ISSUEDBY THE 2ND RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 154 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT
EXHIBIT P4A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM ALONG WITH AFFIDAVIT DATED 05-10-2019 AND CHELAN, FILED BEFORE THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, COCHIN BENCH
EXHIBIT P5A TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED ALONG WITH EXT P4 APPEAL DATED 05-10-2019
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.