Wp(C)/8677/2020 Of The Pazhuvil Service Co-Operative Bank v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)
High Court
11 Jun 2020 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Wp(C)/8677/2020 Of The Pazhuvil Service Co-Operative Bank v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)
Date of order
11 Jun 2020
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Wp(C)/8677/2020 Of The Pazhuvil Service Co-Operative Bank v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), the High Court (2020) decided the matter.
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
THURSDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF JUNE 2020 / 21ST JYAISHTA, 1942WP(C).No.8677 OF 2020(H)
PETITIONER/S:
THE PAZHUVIL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANKNO.126,PAZHUVI WEST, THRISSUR-680564,REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN
RESPONDENT/S:
1THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)AAYAKAR BHAVAN,S.T.NAGAR,THRISSUR-680001.
2THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,
WARD 2 (5),THRISSUR,OFFICE OF THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,SHAKTHANTHAMPURAN NAGAR, THRISSUR-680001.
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI JOSE JOSEPH SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON11.06.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 11[th] day of June 2020
Petitioner has approached this Court seeking a directionto dispose of Exts.P3, P6 and P11 appeals and Exts.P8 and P13staypetitionspreferredbeforethefirstrespondent/Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) against theassessment orders Exts.P1, P4 and P9.
2.Having heard the learned counsel on both sides, thewrit petition is disposed of with a direction to the firstrespondent to take a decision on Exts.P3, P6 and P11 appealsin accordance with law, after affording an opportunity ofhearing to the petitioner, within a period of three months fromthe date of receipt of a copy of this judgment without insistingon payment of 20% of the tax demanded, as per circular of2017. Till such time a decision is taken on the appeal, recoveryproceedings pursuant to the assessment orders shall be kept inabeyance.
sab
Sd/-
AMIT RAWAL
JUDGE
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED14/12/2018 WITH COMPUTATION STATEMENT14/12/2018 WITH COMPUTATION STATEMENT
EXHIBIT P2TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 14/12/201814/12/2018
EXHIBIT P3TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 17/1/2019EXHIBIT P4TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED8/11/2019EXHIBIT P4TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED8/11/2019
EXHIBIT P5TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 8/11/20198/11/2019
EXHIBIT P6TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 30/11/201930/11/2019
EXHIBIT P7TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 6/1/2020EXHIBIT P8TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 15/1/2020EXHIBIT P8TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 15/1/2020
EXHIBIT P9TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED13/11/201913/11/2019
EXHIBIT P10
TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 13/11/201913/11/2019
EXHIBIT P11TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 9/12/2019
EXHIBIT P12TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 6/1/2020EXHIBIT P13TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 15/1/2020EXHIBIT P13TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 15/1/2020
EXHIBIT P14TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 1/7/2019 IN W.A.NO.1536 OF 2019.1/7/2019 IN W.A.NO.1536 OF 2019.
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.