Wp(C)/31209/2019 Of Ithithanam Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd v. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019/28TH KARTHIKA, 1941 W.P(C).No.31209 OF 2019(A) PETITIONER: M/S.ITHITHANAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,MALAKUNNAM P.O, CHANGANCHERRY, KOTTAYAM 686 535 REPRESENTED BY ITS' SECRETARY MR. KURIAN POTHEN. BY ADVS.SRI.A.KUMARSRI.P.J.ANILKUMARSMTG.MINI(1748)SRI.P.S.SREE PRASADSRI.AJAY V.ANANDSHRI.ABRAHAM JOB RESPONDENTS: 1COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)PUBLIC LIBRARY BUILDING, SASTRI ROAD, KOTTAYAM 686 001 2INCOME TAX OFFICER,OFFICE OF THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4, TIRUVALLA 689 101 BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FORADMISSION ON 19.11.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAYDELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J U D G M E N T Against Ext.P1 assessment order under the Income Tax Act,the petitioner had preferred Ext.P3 appeal along with Ext.P4 staypetition before the 1[st] respondent. By Ext.P6 stay order, the 1[st]respondent directed the petitioner to pay 20% of the confirmeddemand as a pre-condition for grant of stay against recovery ofthe balance amounts pending disposal of the appeal. It is thecontention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that Ext.P6stay order is vitiated by a non-application of mind, and further,the issue involved relates to the disallowance of deduction underSection 80P of the Income Tax Act, where, in similar matters, thisCourt has directed the Appellate Authority to consider and passorders in the appeal while granting stay against recovery pendingdisposal of the appeal. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner asalso the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of thecase as also the submissions made across the bar, and finding that in similar cases, this Court has directed the AppellateAuthority to dispose the appeal, I dispose the writ petition byquashing Ext.P6 order, and directing the 1[st] respondent toconsider and pass orders on Ext.P3 appeal within an outer timelimit of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of thisjudgment, after hearing the petitioner. It is made clear that tillsuch time as orders are passed by the 1[st] respondent as directed,and the order communicated to the petitioner, recovery steps forrecovery of amounts confirmed against the petitioner by Ext.P1assessment order shall be kept in abeyance. The petitioner shallproduce a copy of the writ petition together with a copy of thisjudgment, before the 1[st] respondent, for further action. Sd/-A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE prp/19/11/19 W.P.(C).No.31209/2019 : 4 : APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED07-12-2018. EXHIBIT P2TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE OF DEMAND DATED07-12-2018.EXHIBIT P3TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED05-01-2019EXHIBIT P4TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION FOR STAY DATED23-05-2019 EXHIBIT P5TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC NO.2674 OF2019 DATED 24-05-2019 EXHIBIT P6TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 16-10-2019. RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE