Case LawHigh Court › Wp(C)/28936/2021 Of The Karimkunnam Serv...

Wp(C)/28936/2021 Of The Karimkunnam Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd v. Income Tax Officer

High Court 15 Dec 2021 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Wp(C)/28936/2021 Of The Karimkunnam Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd v. Income Tax Officer
Date of order
15 Dec 2021
Assessment year(s)
2018-19
Outcome
Other

Case summary

In Wp(C)/28936/2021 Of The Karimkunnam Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd v. Income Tax Officer, the High Court (2021) decided the matter.

Decision: The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

Sections referenced in this judgment

The order — as passed by the High Court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN WEDNESDAY, THE 15 DAY OF DECEMBER 2021 / 24TH AGRAHAYANA, 1943WP(C) NO. 28936 OF 2021 PETITIONER/S: THE KARIMKUNNAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO. 2670 IX/73, KARIMKUNNAM SCB BUILDING, PALA ROAD, KARIMKUNNAM P.O, THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI -685586 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY DEENA SEBASTIAN BY ADV S.ARUN RAJ RESPONDENT/S: 1THE INCOME TAX OFFICERNEW DELHI-110003 NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, 2ND FLOOR, E-RAMP, JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM, 2NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110001 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, SRI. JOSE JOSEPH, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15.12.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J U D G M E N T The claim of the petitioner for deduction under Section 80 P of the Income Tax Act has been rejected by Ext.P1 assessmentorder. Against Ext.P1 assessment order passed by the 1[st]respondent, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P2 statutory appealbefore the 2[nd] respondent. The grievance of the petitioner is thatthe statutory appeal is not so far disposed of and the petitionerapprehends coercive steps pursuant to Ext.P1 assessment order.The limited prayer of the petitioner is for direction to the 2[nd]respondent to dispose of Ext.P2 appeal against Ext.P1 assessmentorder. 2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and thelearned Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department. 3.In the facts and circumstances of the case, there shallbe a direction to the 2[nd] respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P2 appeal within a period of four months from the date ofreceipt of a certified copy of the judgment. Till such time theorders are passed, there will be a stay of all further recoveryproceedings pursuant to Ext.P1 assessment order. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. Sd/- MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE LU APPENDIX OF WP(C) 28936/2021 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 26.02.2021 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 143(3) R.W.S.143(3A) & 143 (3B) OF THEACT FOR THE AY 2018-19 EXHIBIT P2TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY FOR THE AY 2018-19. // True Copy // PA To Judge
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan