Case LawHigh Court › Wp(C)/9587/2020 Of Elavoor Service Co-Op...

Wp(C)/9587/2020 Of Elavoor Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd v. The Income Tax Officer

High Court 30 Apr 2020 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Wp(C)/9587/2020 Of Elavoor Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd v. The Income Tax Officer
Date of order
30 Apr 2020
Assessment year(s)
2017-18
Outcome
Other

Case summary

In Wp(C)/9587/2020 Of Elavoor Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd v. The Income Tax Officer, 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 BECHU KURIAN THOMAS TUESDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF APRIL, 2020/10TH VAISAKHA, 1942 W.P(C) NO. 9587 OF 2020 PETITIONER: M/S. ELAVOOR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO. 1009, P.O ELAVOOR, ERNAKULAM – 683 572,REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY SHRI JOSEPH P. JOHN RESPONDENTS: THIS WRIT PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30.04.2020, THECOURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: : 2 : JUDGMENT ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Dated this the 30[th] day of April, 2020 I have heard the counsel for the petitioner through video conferencing. I have also heard the standing counsel forincome tax who has taken notice on behalf of respondents. Inthe facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it fit that thiswrit petition be disposed of. 2.Petitioner is an income tax assessee and the issuerelates to the assessment year 2017-18. By Ext.P1, the 1[st]respondent disallowed petitioner’s claim for deduction underSection 80P of the Income Tax Act and demanded an amountof `88,05,629/- as tax. 3.Challenging the said assessment, petitioner haspreferred Ext. P2 appeal contending that the reason fordisallowing petitioner’s claim for deduction under section 80Pis not tenable. While the appeal is pending, the respondentshave initiated recovery proceedings to recover the tax W.P(C) NO. 9587 OF 2020 : 3 : allegedly due. 4.I find force in the contention of the counsel for the petitioner that if the respondents proceed with coercive stepspending consideration of the statutory appeal, the same willbe rendered redundant and petitioner will be put to severedifficulties. In such circumstances, I dispose of the writ petition bydirecting the respondents not to proceed with any coercivesteps against the petitioner pending disposal of Ext.P2appeal. I also direct the 1st respondent to consider anddispose of Ext. P2 appeal within a period of 6 months withoutinsisting on payment of the tax demanded. ncd Sd/- BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : EXHIBIT-P1 :TRUE COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 30.12.2019 FOR AY-2017-18 ALONG WITH DEMAND NOTICE PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT-P2 :TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 24.01.2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR AY-2017-18. DATED 24.01.2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR AY-2017-18. EXHIBIT-P3 :TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 20.04.2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR AY-2017-18
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan