Wp(C) v. Operative Bank Ltd, The Commissioner Of Income Tax
High Court
26 Feb 2020 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Wp(C) v. Operative Bank Ltd, The Commissioner Of Income Tax
Date of order
26 Feb 2020
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Wp(C) v. Operative Bank Ltd, The Commissioner Of Income Tax, the High Court (2020) decided the matter.
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 ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI
WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 7TH PHALGUNA, 1941WP(C).No.5493 OF 2020(J)
PETITIONER/S:
THE MATHRA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO. 314,REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MATHRA P.O., PUNALUR (VIA), KOLLAM DISTRICT-691 333.
BY ADVS.SRI.T.R.HARIKUMARSRI.ARJUN RAGHAVAN
RESPONDENT/S:
1THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-2, OFFICE OF THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KARBALA JUNCTION, KOLLAM, PIN-691 001.WARD-2, OFFICE OF THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KARBALA JUNCTION, KOLLAM, PIN-691 001.
2THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS),AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 003.AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 003.
BY SC SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON26.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 26th day of February 2020
Heard Sri. T.R.Harikumar, the learned counsel for
the petitioner and Sri. Christopher Abraham, the learnedStanding Counsel for respondents.
2.
Petitioner refers to and relies on judgment
dated 01.07.2019 in W.A No.1536 of 2019 and connected
cases to contend that the Division Bench directed
disposal of appeal and granted stay of recoveryproceedings during the pendency of the appeal.
3.
The learned Standing Counsel admits that the
facts of the case are substantially same and similar to thefacts noted by the Division Bench in W.A. No.1536 of2019, hence can be followed.
Hence, the writ petition is disposed of directing the
Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/ 2[nd] respondentto consider and dispose of the statutory appeal filed bythe petitioner herein at the earliest taking note of theFull Bench decision reported in The Mavilayi Service Co-
v. operative Bank Ltd, The Commissioner of Income Tax,
Calicut[2019 (2) KHC 287] and to keep in abeyancerecovery proceedings and collection of tax assessed,pending disposal of such appeal.
Sd/-
S.V.BHATTI
JUDGE
uu
27.02.2020
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDERFOR THE YEAR 2017-2018 DATED 6.12.2019.
EXHIBIT P2A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SECTION 156 OF THE INCOME TAXACT DATED 6.12.2019.
EXHIBIT P3A TRUE COPY OF THE ONLINE APEAL DATED 25.12.2019 ALONG WITH GROUNDSOF APPEAL, FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT, AGAINST EXT.P1 ASSESSMENT ORDER.
EXHIBIT P4A TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN EXT.P3 APPEAL SUBMITTED ON 14.1.2020.FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN EXT.P3 APPEAL SUBMITTED ON 14.1.2020.
EXHIBIT P5A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMETN DATED 19.7.2019 IN W.A.NO.1639 OF 2019.19.7.2019 IN W.A.NO.1639 OF 2019.
EXHIBIT P6
A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 17.2.2020 IN WPC NO.4433 OF 2020.17.2.2020 IN WPC NO.4433 OF 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.