Wp(C)/9124/2018 Of Mudavanmughal Service Co-Operative Bank Limited v. The Income Tax Officer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR FRIDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF MARCH 2018 / 25TH PHALGUNA, 1939 WP(C).No. 9124 of 2018 PETITIONER MUDAVANMUGHAL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED NO.T 847, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY V.G.MAHILA, S/O.JAYAKUMARAN NAIR, POOJAPPURA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN: 695 012. BY ADVS.SRI.C.A.JOJO SRI.JACOB CHACKO SRI.MATHEWS JOSEPH RESPONDENTS: 1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -2(1) KOWDIAR, TRIVANDRUM 695 003 2. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-1, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), TRIVANDRUM 695 003. BY SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16-03-2018,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 A COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL) THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 06/02/2004EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 29/12/2016 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENTEXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 29/12/2017 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENTEXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FOR AY 2014-15 DATED 8/5/2017 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENTEXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FOR AY 2014-15 DATED 12/3/2018 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT 24/5/2017 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENTEXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE RECTIFIED ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 28/2/2018 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENTEXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 24/5/2017 BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:NIL //TRUE COPY// SD/- PA TO JUDGE P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.9124 of 2018 --------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 16[th] day of March, 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 byExt.P2 assessment order, the petitioner preferred Ext.P4 appealbefore the second respondent. Ext.P5 is the application forstay preferred by the petitioner in Ext.P4 appeal. Thegrievance of the petitioner in the writ petition concerns thedelay on the part of the second respondent in passing orderson Ext.P5 application for stay. It is alleged by the petitioner inthe writ petition that proceedings have already been initiatedfor realisation of the amounts covered by Ext.P2 order. Thepetitioner, therefore, seeks appropriate directions in thisregard, 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 petitiondirecting the second respondent to take a decision on Ext.P5application 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.P5 application for stay, furtherproceedings for realisation of the amounts covered by Ext.P2assessment order shall be deferred. rsr Sd/- P.B.SURESH KUMAR JUDGE