Case LawHigh Court › Wp(C)/31911/2019 Of Perunguzhi Service C...

Wp(C)/31911/2019 Of Perunguzhi Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd v. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(5)

High Court 26 Nov 2019 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Wp(C)/31911/2019 Of Perunguzhi Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd v. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(5)
Date of order
26 Nov 2019
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

Case summary

In Wp(C)/31911/2019 Of Perunguzhi Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd v. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(5), 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

The order — as passed by the High Court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 / 5TH AGRAHAYANA, 1941 WP(C).No.31911 OF 2019(L) PETITIONER: PERUNGUZHI SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.2403REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PERUNGUZHI P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695 305. BY ADVS.SRI.T.R.HARIKUMARSRI.ARJUN RAGHAVAN RESPONDENTS: BY ADV.SRI. CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON26.11.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT 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. It is stated by the learned counselfor the petitioner that the issue involved in the appeal pertains to dis-allowance of deduction claimed under Section 80P of the Income TaxAct. 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 and taking note of the fact thatin similar matters, this Court has directed the Appellate Authority toconsider and pass orders in the appeal and stayed the recovery ofdisputed amounts pending disposal of the appeal, this Writ petition isdisposed directing the 3[rd] respondent to consider and pass orders on W.P(C).No.31911 of 2019 Ext.P4 appeal within an outer time limit of six months. Recovery stepsfor recovery of amounts confirmed against the petitioner shall be kept inabeyance till such time as orders are passed by the 3[rd] respondent asdirected above and communicated to the petitioner. Sd/- A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE mns APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: 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