Wp(C)/6208/2018 Of Manamboor 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. 6208 of 2018 PETITIONER MANAMBOOR SERVICE CO OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED NO.2825 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY SHRI.V.B.PRAKASH BABU, S/O. BALAKRISHNAN AGED 55 YEARS, MAMBOOR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPRUAM DISTRICT PIN - 695605. BY ADVS.SRI.C.A.JOJO SRI.JACOB CHACKO SRI.MATHEWS JOSEPH RESPONDENTS: 1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2(2) KOWDIAR, TRIVANDRUM - 695003 2. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-1, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOEM TAX (APPEALS), TRIVANDRUM - 695003. BY 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: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE IN THIS REGARD ISSUED BY THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL) THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 12/10/2015.EXHIBIT P2: COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 29/11/2017 ISSUED BY THE R1.EXHIBIT P3: COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 29/11/2017 ISSUED BY THE R1EXHIBIT P4: COPY OF THE E-FILED APPEAL FOR AY 2015-16 DATED 12/12/2017 FILED BEFORE THER2.EXHIBIT P5: COPY OF THE STAY PETITIONF OR AY 2015-16 DATED 10/2/2018 BEFORE THE R2.EXHIBIT P6: COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 12/2/2018 BY THE R1. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:NIL //TRUE COPY// Sd/- PA TO JUDGErsr P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.6208 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 byExt.P2 assessment order, the petitioner preferred Ext.P4appeal before the second respondent. Ext.P5 is the applicationfor stay preferred by the petitioner in Ext.P4 appeal. Thegrievance of the petitioner in the writ petition concerns thedelay on the part of the second respondent in passing orderson Ext.P5 application for stay. It is alleged by the petitioner inthe writ petition that proceedings have already been initiatedfor realisation 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 Ext.P5application for stay, within two months from the date of receipt ofa copy of this judgment. Ordered accordingly. Needless to saythat until orders are passed on Ext.P5 application for stay, furtherproceedings for realisation of the amounts covered by Ext.P2assessment order shall be deferred. rsr Sd/- P.B.SURESH KUMAR JUDGE