Wp(C)/9962/2020 Of Ollukkara Service Co Operative Bank Limited v. The Income Tax Officer
High Court
15 May 2020 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Wp(C)/9962/2020 Of Ollukkara Service Co Operative Bank Limited v. The Income Tax Officer
Date of order
15 May 2020
Assessment year(s)
2010-11, 2016-17, 2017-18
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Wp(C)/9962/2020 Of Ollukkara Service Co Operative Bank Limited v. The Income Tax Officer, the High Court (2020) decided the matter.
Decision: With these directions, this Writ petition is disposed of. acd GOPINATH.P., JUDGE.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMPRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE GOPINATH.P.
FRIDAY, THE 15 DAY OF MAY, 2020/25 VAISAKHA, 1942W.P(C) NO.9962 OF 2020
PETITIONER
OLLUKKARA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED,
NO.544, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MANNUTHY P.O, THRISSUR DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN-680561
By Adv. Sri.C. A. JOJO.
RESPONDENTS
1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD2 (3), AYAKAR BHAVAN, SAKTHAN STAND, THRISSUR-68001
2. THE COMMISSIONER,
AYAKAR BHAVAN, SAKTHAN STAND, THRISSUR-68001
R1-2 BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH
THIS WRIT PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON15.05.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THEFOLLOWING:
Dated this the 15[th] day of May, 2020
JUDGMENT
The petitioner claimed the benefit of Section 80P of the Income TaxAct. This claim was rejected by the Assessing Officer. Petitioner has preferredappeals before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Thrissur, separatelyfor each of the Assessment years in question. These appeals are produced asExts.P3, P6 and P9. It is not disputed that other writ petitions (in identicalsituation) have been disposed of directing the Appellate Authority to considerand dispose of the appeals further directing that recovery proceedings shall bekept in abeyance pending such consideration.
2.In the light of the above, this Writ Petition is disposed of directingthe Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Thrissur to consider and passorders on Exts.P3, P6 and P9 in this writ petition, within a period of fourmonths from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till orders are sopassed and communicated to the petitioner, steps (if any) initiated by the
Income Tax Department for recovery of amounts due under the assessment
orders in question, shall be kept in abeyance.
With these directions, this Writ petition is disposed of.
acd
GOPINATH.P., JUDGE.
APPENDIX
PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT-P1: A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AY 2010-11 DATED11.12.2017 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P2: A TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE U/S 156 DATED11.12.2017 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FOR AY 2010-11 BEFORE THE2 RESPONDENT DATED 05.01.2018
EXHIBIT-P4: A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR AY 2016-17DATED 28.12.2018 BY THE 1 RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P5. A TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE FOR U/S 156 DATED28.12.2018 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P6: A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FOR AY 2016-17 BEFORE THE2 RESPONDENT DATED 18.01.2019
EXHIBIT P7. A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR AY 2017-18DATED 24.12.2019 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P8: A TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE U/S 156 DATED24.12.2019 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P9: A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FOR AY 2017-18 BEFORE THE2 RESPONDENT DATED 17.01.2020
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.