Wp(C)/9674/2020 Of The Karumalloor Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd v. The Income Tax Officer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMPRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS TUESDAY, THE 05 DAY OF MAY, 2020/15TH VAISAKHA, 1942W.P(C) NO.9674 OF 2020 PETITIONER THE KARUMALLOOR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO. 737,KARUMALLOOR P.O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - PIN- 683 511REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, SRI. T.T SREEKUMAR. BY ADVS. SRI. M.M.MONAYE AND SRI. M.PAUL VARGHESE -RESPONDENTS: 1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2, TPS, KAP COMMERCIAL COMPLEX O/O ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ALUVA RANGE, R.S. ROAD, ALUVA - 683 101. WARD - 2, TPS, KAP COMMERCIAL COMPLEX O/O ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ALUVA RANGE, R.S. ROAD, ALUVA - 683 101. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), 281243,"POORNIMA", NEAR MANORAMA JUNCTION, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, KOCHI- 682 036. BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC THIS WRIT PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON05.05.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THEFOLLOWING: JUDGMENT 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 issue relates 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 Rs.1,62,28,187/- as tax. 3. Challenging the said assessment, petitioner has preferred Ext.P2 appeal contending that the reason fordisallowing petitioner’s claim for deduction under section 80P isnot tenable. While the appeal is pending, the respondents have initiated recovery proceedings to recover the tax allegedly due.4. I find force in the contention of the counsel for thepetitioner that if the respondents proceed with coercive steps W.P(C) NO.9674 OF 2020 3 pending consideration of the statutory appeal, the same will berendered redundant and petitioner will be put to severedifficulties. 5. In such circumstances, I dispose of the writ petitionby directing the respondents not to proceed with any coercivesteps against the petitioner pending disposal of Ext.P2 appeal.I also direct the 2[nd] respondent to consider and dispose ofExt. P2 appeal within a period of 6 months without insisting onpayment of 10% of the tax demanded. Sd/- vps BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE W.P(C) NO.9674 OF 2020 4 APPENDIX PETITIONERS EXTS: -EXHIBIT: P1TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 29.12.2019 ALONG WITH DEMAND NOTICE -EXHIBIT: P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 17.01.2019 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2 RESPONDENT -EXHIBIT: P3BY THE 1 RESPONDENT TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 17.3.2020 ISSUED -EXHIBIT: P4TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 18.3.2020 ALONG WITH THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT