Wp(C)/8665/2020 Of Parayakad Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd v. The Income Tax Officer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMPRESENTTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESHFRIDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF APRIL 2020 / 4TH VAISAKHA, 1942 WP(C) NO. 8665 OF 2020 Petitioner:- Parayakad Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. No.2869,Represented by its Secretary, Parayakad,Cherthala, Alappuzha District-Pin-688 550. By Advs. T.R.HarikumarArjun Raghavan Respondents:- 1.The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Office of theIncome Tax Officer, Arattukulangara Complex,A.N.Puram, Alappuzha-Pin-688 011. Income Tax Officer, Arattukulangara Complex,A.N.Puram, Alappuzha-Pin-688 011. 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Public Library Building, Sastri Road, Kottayam-Pin-686 001. Public Library Building, Sastri Road, Kottayam-Pin-686 001. 3.The Kerala State Co-operative Bank, Alappuzha District Office, Represented by its General Manager, Alappuzha-Pin-688 011 Alappuzha District Office, Represented by its General Manager, Alappuzha-Pin-688 011 ByStanding Counsel Sri. Christopher Abraham, Income Tax This writ petition having come up for admission on 24.04.2020, the court on the same day passed the following: JUDGMENT ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Dated this the 24[th] day of April, 2020 Standing Counsel for Income Tax takes notice forrespondents 1 to 3. 2.Petitioner is an income tax assessee. Theassessment year in question is 2017-'18. By Ext.P1, the 1[st]respondent disallowed petitioner's claim for deduction underSection 80-P of the Income Tax Act and demanded₹1,26,55,451/- as tax. The petitioner filed Ext.P3 appealcontending that reasoning given in Ext.P1 is untenable.Pending the appeal, the 1[st] respondent initiated coerciveproceedings. The 1[st] respondent issued Ext.P5 demanding10% of the disputed tax as a condition to stay furtherproceedings. 3.Heard learned counsel for the petitioner andlearned Standing Counsel for Income Tax. WPC.8665/2020 : 3 : 4. If the respondents proceed with coercive steps pending consideration of statutory appeal, the statutoryremedy available to the petitioner will be negated and thepetitioner is likely to be put to difficulties. In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents not to proceed with coercivesteps against the petitioner pending disposal of Ext.P3appeal. Ext.P3 appeal shall be considered and disposed ofby the 2[nd] respondent within a period of six months, withoutinsisting on payment of 10% of the demanded tax. Sd/- N. NAGARESH, JUDGE aks/24.04.2020 WPC.8665/2020 Appendix Petitioner’s Exhibits: Exhibit-P1A true copy of the assessment order for the year 2017-2018 dated 28-12-2019. dated 28-12-2019. Exhibit-P2A true copy of the notice issued under Section 156 of the Income Tax Act dated 28-12-2019. Income Tax Act dated 28-12-2019. Exhibit-P3A true copy of the online appeal dated 23-01-2020 filed by the petitioner before the 2[nd ]respondent, against Ext-P1 assessment order. petitioner before the 2[nd ]respondent, against Ext-P1 assessment order. Exhibit-P4A true copy of the stay petition filed by the petitioner in Ext-P3 appeal dated 10-02-2020. appeal dated 10-02-2020. Exhibit-P5A true copy of the order in ITBA No.10430/CIT(A)/ KTM/2019-20 dated 09-03-2020, passed by the 2[nd ]respondent in Ext-P4 stay petition. 20 dated 09-03-2020, passed by the 2[nd ]respondent in Ext-P4 stay petition. Exhibit-P6A true copy of the judgment dated 19-07-2019 in W.A No.1639 of 2019. No.1639 of 2019. Exhibit-P7A true copy of the judgment dated 17-02-2020 in WP(C) No.4433 of 2020. No.4433 of 2020.