Wp(C)/5422/2018 Of Chekkiad Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd v. Incometax Officer, Ward-2(2), Kozhikode

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR MONDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2018 / 7TH PHALGUNA, 1939 WP(C).No. 5422 of 2018 PETITIONER(S) CHEKKIAD SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED:F 1657 P.O.CHEKKIAD; VIA PARAKKADAVU, KOZHIKODE 673 509, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY SRI. SANEESH KUMAR K. BY ADVS.SRI.P.RAGHUNATH SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN RESPONDENT(S): 1. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2), KOZHIKODE 673 001. 2. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) KOZHIKODE: 673 001. KOZHIKODE: 673 001. R BY SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26-02-2018,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 PHOTOCOPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DT. 20.12.2016 OF M/S.NADAPURAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. FOR 2011.12 EXHIBIT P2 PHOTOCOPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR 2015.16 DT. 28.12.2017 EXHIBIT P3 PHOTOCOPY OF APPEAL FILED AGAINST EXT.P3 RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:NIL SKS //TRUE COPY// SD/- P.A. TO JUDGE P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C).No.5422 of 2018 = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 26[th] day of February, 2018 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is an assessee under the Income Tax Act(the Act) on the rolls of the first respondent. Aggrieved byExt.P2 assessment order, the petitioner preferred Ext.P3 appealbefore the second respondent. After the institution of the writpetition, it stated that the petitioner preferred an applicationfor stay in Ext.P3 appeal. It is alleged by the petitioner in thewrit petition that proceedings have already been initiated forrealisation of the amounts covered by Ext.P2 order. Thepetitioner, therefore, seeks appropriate directions in thisregard, in this writ petition. 2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner asalso the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of thecase, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petitiondirecting the second respondent to take a decision on theapplication for stay preferred by the petitioner in Ext.P3 appeal, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of thisjudgment. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say that until ordersare passed on the application for stay, further proceedings forrealisation of the amounts covered by Ext.P2 assessment ordershall be deferred. Sd/- P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE. SKS