Wp(C)/7707/2020 Of The Kerala State Co-Operative Bank Ltd v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF JULY 2020 / 7TH SRAVANA, 1942WP(C).No.7707 OF 2020(K) PETITIONER: THE KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,(ERSTWHILE THE THRISSUR DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED), THRISSUR, SAHAKARANA SATABDHI MANDIRAM, KOVILAKATHUMPADAM, THRISSUR - 680 022, REPRESENTED BYITS DISTRICT MANAGER. BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC, THRISSUR DISTRICT CO.OPERATIVE BANK LTD. RESPONDENTS: 1THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS),THRISSUR - 680 001.THRISSUR - 680 001. 2THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE 2 (1), AYAKAR BHAVAN, SAKTHAN THAMPURAN NAGAR,THRISSUR - 680 001.CIRCLE 2 (1), AYAKAR BHAVAN, SAKTHAN THAMPURAN NAGAR,THRISSUR - 680 001. 3THE STATE BANK OF INDIA,REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER, MAIN BRANCH, THRISSUR- 680 001.REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER, MAIN BRANCH, THRISSUR- 680 001. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON29.07.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT Challenging the assessment for the year 2017- 2018, the petitioner has filed an appeal before the 1[st]respondent. The appeal is accompanied by anapplication for stay. 2.Pending the appeal, Ext.P8 order was passedon the stay petition, granting stay with a rider directingthe petitioner to remit 20% of total demand. Thepetitioner challenges the said order. Pending the appeal, Ext.P8 order was passed 3.Heard Sri.P.C.Sasidharan, the learned counselfor the petitioner and Sri.Jose Joseph, the learnedStanding Counsel for the respondents. Heard Sri.P.C.Sasidharan, the learned counsel 4.A perusal of Ext.P8 order shows that there isno discussion or reason stated as to why the petitionerhas been directed to remit 20% of the demand. It is onlyproper that a reasoned order be passed especially sincethe petitioner seeks for an unconditional stay. Freshorders needs to be passed on the stay petition.Necesssarily, the petitioner shall also be heard beforepassing the order. Accordingly, Ext.P8 order is quashed. The 1[st]respondent is directed to pass fresh orders on the staypetition, after hearing the petitioner, as expeditiously aspossible and at any rate, within a period of two weeksfrom today. Sd/- SATHISH NINANJUDGE rsr APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 16/12/2019. EXHIBIT P2EXHIBIT P3EXHIBIT P4EXHIBIT P5EXHIBIT P6EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE. TRUE COPY OF THE COMPUTATION SHEET. TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 02/01/2020. TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION. TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C) 9506 0F 2019 DATED 27/03/2019. TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 27/1/2020 IN W.P.(C) 2194 OF 2020. EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 05/03/2020.