Case LawHigh Court › Wp(C)/30990/2019 Of The Veliyannur Servi...

Wp(C)/30990/2019 Of The Veliyannur Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd v. The Income Tax Officer

High Court 16 Nov 2019 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Wp(C)/30990/2019 Of The Veliyannur Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd v. The Income Tax Officer
Date of order
16 Nov 2019
Assessment year(s)
2013-14, 2015-16
Outcome
Other

Case summary

In Wp(C)/30990/2019 Of The Veliyannur Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd v. The Income Tax Officer, the High Court (2019) decided the matter.

Decision: In the light of Ext.P8 judgment, all recoveryproceedings pursuant to the impugned orders in the appealsbefore the third respondent shall be kept in abeyance tillthe appeals are disposed of.

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 A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE SATURDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 / 25TH KARTHIKA, 1941WP(C).No.30990 OF 2019(W) PETITIONER/S: M/S.THE VALIYANNUR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.C 417, MATTANNUR ROAD, VARAM.P.O, KANNUR-670594, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY SUNIL KUMAR.P. BY ADVS.SRI.S.ARUN RAJSRI. PAUL JOHN RESPONDENT/S: BY SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON16.11.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:16.11.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT Dated this the 16th day of November 2019 The petitioner is a Primary Agricultural CreditSociety. Aggrieved by Ext.P7 order of the secondrespondent, they approached this Court. By the said order,the petitioner was directed to pay 20% of the disputedamount demanded by the second respondent. A similar issuewas considered by this Court in W.P.(C) No.28170/2019 dated23.10.2019, produced as Ext.P8. In the light of Ext.P8 judgment, all recoveryproceedings pursuant to the impugned orders in the appealsbefore the third respondent shall be kept in abeyance tillthe appeals are disposed of. The writ petition is disposed of as above. ln Sd/- A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE JUDGE WP(C).No.30990/2019 3 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 25.1.2016PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 143(3)OF THE ACT FOR THE AY 2013-14.PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 143(3)OF THE ACT FOR THE AY 2013-14. EXHIBIT P2TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2013-14.PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2013-14. EXHIBIT P3TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 18.12.2017 PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) FOR THE AY2015-16.18.12.2017 PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) FOR THE AY2015-16. EXHIBIT P4TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2015-16.PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2015-16. EXHIBIT P5TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION OF STAY FILED BY THEPETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2013-14.PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2013-14. EXHIBIT P6TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION OF STAY FILED BY THEPETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2015-16.PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2015-16. EXHIBIT P7TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 30.09.2019 PASSED BYTHE 2ND RESPONDENT, COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOZHIKODE DISPOSING THE STAY PETITIONS FOR THE AY2013-14 AND 2015-16.THE 2ND RESPONDENT, COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOZHIKODE DISPOSING THE STAY PETITIONS FOR THE AY2013-14 AND 2015-16. EXHIBIT P8TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 23.10.2019 PASSEDBY THIS HONOURABLE COURT IN WP9C0NO.28170/2019 SIMILAR CASEBY THIS HONOURABLE COURT IN WP9C0NO.28170/2019 SIMILAR CASE RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A.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