Wp(C)/6195/2018 Of Mundela Service Co-Operative Bank Limited v. The Income Tax Officer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR FRIDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2018 / 4TH PHALGUNA, 1939 WP(C).No. 6195 of 2018 PETITIONER MUNDELA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED NO.2433 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, K.GOPINATHAN NAIR, AGED 57 YEARS, MUNDELA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN-695543. BY ADVS.SRI.C.A.JOJO SRI.JACOB CHACKO SRI.MATHEWS JOSEPH RESPONDENTS: 1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER INCOME TAX OFFICE, WARD 2(3), KOWDIAR, TRIVANDRUM-695003. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX WARD 2(3), KOWDIAR, TRIVANDRUM-695003. 3. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-1 OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), TRIVANDRUM-695003. 4. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), TRIVANDRUM-695003. BY STANDING COUNSEL:SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23-02-2018,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 A COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE IN THIS REGARD ISSUED BY THE ASST.REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL) NEDUMANGAD DATED 13-03-2014.EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR AY 2008-09 DATED 30-03-2014 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT.EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR AY 2013-14 DATED 26-02-2016 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT.EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR AY 2014-15 DATED 30-12-2016 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT.EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE FOR AY 2008-09 DATED 30-03-2014 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT.EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE FOR AY 2013-14 DATED 26-02-2016 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT.EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE FOR AY 2014-15 DATED 30-12-2016 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT.EXHIBIT P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL AY 2008-09 DATED 02-05-2014 FILED BEFORE THE THIRD RESPONDENT.EXHIBIT P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL AY 2013-14 DATED 31-03-2016 FILED BEFORE THE THIRD RESPONDENT.EXHIBIT P10 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL AY 2014-15 DATED 31-01-2017 FILED BEFORE THE THIRD RESPONDENT.EXHIBIT P11 A TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FOR AY 2008-09 DATED 02-05-2014 BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.EXHIBIT P12 A TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FOR AY 2013-14 DATED 31-03-2016 BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.EXHIBIT P13 A TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FOR AY 2014-15 DATED 07-09-2017 BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.EXHIBIT P14 A TRUE COPY OF THE REVIEW PETITION FOR AYS 2008-09, 2013-14 AND 2014-15 DATED 07-09-2017 BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT.EXHIBIT P15 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ON REVIEW PETITION DATED 07-02-2018 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE 4TH RESPONDENT.EXHIBIT P16 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE HON'BLE ITAT, COCHIN BENCH IN ITA NO.361/COH/2016 DATED 18-11-2016. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:NIL //TRUE COPY// Sd/- PA TO JUDGE P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.6195 of 2018 --------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 23[rd] day of February, 2018 J U D G M E N T RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:NIL //TRUE COPY// Sd/- PA TO JUDGE P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.6195 of 2018 --------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 23[rd] 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 byExts.P2 to P4 assessment orders, the petitioner preferredExts.P8 to P10 appeals before the third respondent. Exts.P11to P13 are the applications for stay preferred by the petitionerin Exts.P8 to P10 appeals. The grievance of the petitioner inthe writ petition concerns the delay on the part of the thirdrespondent in passing orders on Exts.P11 to P13 applicationsfor stay. It is alleged by the petitioner in the writ petition thatproceedings have already been initiated for realisation of theamounts covered by Exts.P2 to P4 orders. The petitioner,therefore, seeks appropriate directions in this regard, in thiswrit 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 third respondent to take a decision on Exts.P11 toP13 applications for stay, within two months from the date ofreceipt of a copy of this judgment. Ordered accordingly.Needless to say that until orders are passed on Exts.P11 to P13applications for stay, further proceedings for realisation of theamounts covered by Exts.P2 to P4 assessment orders shall bedeferred. rsr Sd/- P.B.SURESH KUMAR JUDGE