Wp(C)/7415/2018 Of The Alathur Service Co-Operative Bank v. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR MONDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2018 / 19TH CHAITHRA, 1940 WP(C).No. 7415 of 2018 PETITIONER(S) THE ALATHUR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO. F. 1222 REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, ALATHUR, ALATHUR POST, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678541.. BY ADVS.SRI.P.N.MOHANAN SRI.C.P.SABARI RESPONDENT(S): 1. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AAYAKAR BYHAVAN, SAKTHAN THAMPURAN RANGAR, THRISSUR-680 001. 2. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD NO.-5, PALAKKAD, OFFICE OF THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PALAKKAD RANGE, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, E.C. ROAD, PALAKKAD-678 014. R BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09-04-2018,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE PRE-ASSESSMENT NOTICE DATED 22.11.2016 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT.EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED 2.12.2016 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER SOCIETY.EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 14.12.2016 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT.EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 19.12.2016 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-2012.EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 19.12.2016 U/S 156 OF THE IT ACT.EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 19.12.2016 BEFORE IMPOSING PENALTY ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT.EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN 2016(2) KHC 726 DB.EXHIBIT P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL PETITION DATED 17.1.2017 FILED BY THE PETITIONER THE FIRST RESPONDENT.EXHIBITP9 A TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 20-03-2018 PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT // true copy // Sd/-PS TO JUDGE Kvs/- P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C).No.7415 of 2018 = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 9th day of April, 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 by Ext.P4assessment order, the petitioner preferred Ext.P8 appeal beforethe second respondent. Ext.P9 is the application for staypreferred by the petitioner in Ext.P8 appeal. The grievance of thepetitioner in the writ petition concerns the delay on the part ofthe second respondent in passing orders on Ext.P9 application forstay. It is alleged by the petitioner in the writ petition thatproceedings have already been initiated for realisation of theamounts covered by Ext.P4 order. The petitioner, therefore,seeks appropriate directions in this regard, 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 petition WPC.No.7415 of 2018 directing the second respondent to take a decision on Ext.P9application 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.P9 application for stay, furtherproceedings for realisation of the amounts covered by Ext.P4assessment order shall be deferred. Sd/-P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE. Kvs/- // true copy //