Case LawHigh Court › Wp(C)/6594/2020 Of Sreekandamangalam Ser...

Wp(C)/6594/2020 Of Sreekandamangalam Service Co Operative Bank Ltd v. Income Tax Officer

High Court 04 Mar 2020 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Wp(C)/6594/2020 Of Sreekandamangalam Service Co Operative Bank Ltd v. Income Tax Officer
Date of order
04 Mar 2020
Assessment year(s)
2017-2018, 2017-18
Outcome
Other

Case summary

In Wp(C)/6594/2020 Of Sreekandamangalam Service Co Operative Bank Ltd v. Income Tax Officer, the High Court (2020) decided the matter.

Decision: 2.Having heard the learned counsel on both sides, thewrit petition is disposed of with a direction to the secondrespondent to take a decision on Ext.P3 appeal in accordancewith law, after affording an opportunity of hearing to thepetitioner, within a period of three months from the date ofreceipt of...

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

The order — as passed by the High Court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL WEDNESDAY, THE 04TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 14TH PHALGUNA, 1941 WP(C).No.6594 OF 2020(Y) PETITIONER/S: SREEKANDAMANGALAM SERVICE CO OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO. 974MUTTATHIPARAMBU P O, CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA-688527, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY-IN-CHARGE. BY ADV. SRI.C.A.JOJO RESPONDENT/S: 1INCOME TAX OFFICERCIRCLE, ALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA-688011.2COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOTTAYAM-686001. SRI JOSE JOSEPH SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON04.03.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT Petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction todispose of Ext.P3 appeal preferred before the secondrespondent/Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) against theassessment order Ext.P1. 2.Having heard the learned counsel on both sides, thewrit petition is disposed of with a direction to the secondrespondent to take a decision on Ext.P3 appeal in accordancewith law, after affording an opportunity of hearing to thepetitioner, within a period of three months from the date ofreceipt of a copy of this judgment without insisting on paymentof 20% of the tax demanded, as per circular of 2017. Till suchtime a decision is taken on the appeal, recovery proceedingspursuant to the assessment order shall be kept in abeyance. Sd/ AMIT RAWAL JUDGE APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR AY-2017-2018 DATED 27.12.2019 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE U/S. 156 DATED 27.12.2019 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FOR AY 2017-18 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 05.1.2020. EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF DEMAND DATED 26.02.2020 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
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