Wp(C)/8229/2016 Of The Triprangode Service Co-Operative Bank Limited v. The Income Tax Officer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF MARCH 2016/13TH PHALGUNA, 1937 PETITIONER(S): WP(C).No. 8229 of 2016 (C) --------------------------- THE TRIPRANGODE SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED, NO.1890, REPRESENTED BY ITS THE SECRETARY SHRI.SURESH.P.V., AGED 54 YEARS, TRIPRANGODE.P.O, TIROOR, MALAPPURAM, PIN-676108. BY ADVS.SRI.C.A.JOJO SRI.JACOB CHACKO SRI.MATHEWS JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S): 1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD NO-1, OFFICE OF THE INCOME TAX OFFICE, TARIFF BAZAR, OPP.TOWN HALL, TIRUR-676 101. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS), OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS),KOZHIKODE -673 001.KOZHIKODE -673 001. BY SRI.K.M.V.PANDALAI, SC, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03-03-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rvs. PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS : APPENDIX EXT. P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER 09.02.2015 FOR AY 2007-08. EXT. P2 TRUE COPY OF DEMAND 09.02.2015 FOR AY 2007-08. EXT. P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 30.03.2015 BY AY 2007-08. EXT. P4 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 03.02.2015. EXT. P5 TRUE COPY OF THE APPELLATE ORDER ON STAY PETITION DATED 05.10.2015ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT. P6 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 09.10.2015 BEFORE ITAT, COCHINBENCH.BENCH. EXT. P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ON STAY PETITION DATED 29.01.2016 BY THEITAT.ITAT. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL. /TRUE COPY/ rvs. P.A.TO JUDGE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.------------------------------- W.P.(C).NO.8229 OF 2016 (C)-----------------------------------Dated this the 3[rd] day of March, 2016 J U D G M E N T Against Ext.P1 assessment order under the Income Tax Act, thepetitioner has preferred Ext.P3 appeal and Ext.P4 stay petition beforethe 2[nd] respondent. In the stay application that was filed along withthe appeal, the 2[nd] respondent passed Ext.P5 order dismissing the stayapplication stating that the petitioner was not ready to accept theoffer of payment of 50% of the amounts confirmed against him by theassessment order as a condition for grant of stay. Ext.P5 order isimpugned in the writ petition. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and alsothe learned Standing counsel for the respondents. 3. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the caseas also the submissions made across the bar, I find that the issueinvolved in the appeals pending before the 2[nd] respondent is theentitlement of the petitioner to the benefit of Section 80 P of the Income Tax Act. I note that a number of income tax appeals on thesame issue have since been decided by this Court in favour of theassessee, and therefore, the petitioner would prima facie be entitledto the benefit of these judgments. Taking note of the said fact, I am ofthe view that, Ext.P5 order to the extent it dismisses the stayapplication filed by the petitioner pending disposal of the appealscannot be legally sustained. Accordingly, I quash Ext.P5 order anddirect the 2[nd] respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3appeal within a period of three months after hearing the petitioner. Itis made clear that recovery steps for recovery of amounts confirmedagainst the petitioner by Ext.P1 assessment order shall be kept inabeyance till such time as orders are passed by the 2[nd] respondent asdirected above and communicated to the petitioner. The petitionershall produce a copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writpetition before the 2[nd] respondent for further action. The writ petition is disposed as above. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE