"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS THURSDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF MARCH 2022 / 12TH PHALGUNA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 6951 OF 2022 PETITIONER: ANAND FARMERS SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.919, ANAD P O, NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695541, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR-IN-CHARGE. BY ADV ANIL K.NAIR RESPONDENTS: 1 ADDTIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME TAX OFFICER, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DELHI-110001. 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DELHI-110001. 3 KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK (ERSTWHILE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT OFFICE, EAST FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001) REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER. OTHER PRESENT: ADV.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM FOR R1 R2. AD. THOMAS ABRAHAM FOR R3. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.03.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 6951 OF 2022 2 BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J .............................................… W.P.(C) NO. 6951 OF 2022 …........................................ Dated this the 3rd day of March, 2022 JUDGMENT Petitioner is a Primary Agricultural Credit Society registered under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969. Ext.P1 order of assessment was issued against the petitioner on 28.09.2021. In the assessment order, petitioner's claim for deduction under Section 80P was rejected on the ground that there was no evidence to show that petitioner satisfied the ingredients of the Primary Agricultural Credit Society as contemplated under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act. 2. While assailing the assessment order before the 2nd respondent, petitioner has sought to canvass that the judgment of the Supreme Court in Mavilayi Service Co- operative Bank Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax [2021 (1) KLT 485] was not considered by the assessing WP(C) NO. 6951 OF 2022 3 officer though the assessment order was rendered subsequent to the Supreme Court Judgment. 3. Since the petitioner has already preferred an appeal as Ext.P3 and the same is pending consideration before the 2nd respondent, I deem it fit that this writ petition be disposed of directing the Appellate Authority to consider the appeal in a time bound manner. 4. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P3, as expeditiously as possible. 5. Till the disposal of the appeal, no coercive steps shall be initiated against the petitioner pursuant to Ext.P1 assessment order. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE AJM WP(C) NO. 6951 OF 2022 4 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 6951/2022 PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS : Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2014-2015 DATED 28/09/2021. Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE OF DEMAND DATED 28/09/2021 ISSUED UNDER SECTION 156 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. Exhibit P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ONLINE APPEAL DATED 29.12.2021, ALONG WITH GROUNDS OF APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT, AGAINST EXHIBIT P1 ASSESSMENT ORDER. Exhibit P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 27.01.2022 IN WPC NO.29980 OF 2021. RESPONDENT’S EXHIBITS : NIL AJM //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE "