AVANANKUZHI SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.2387 V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/657/2020

AI Insights

The case involves Avanankuzhi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., which filed a writ petition against the Income Tax Officer and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The petitioner challenged the assessment order for the year 2017-18 and sought a stay on the demand notice issued for the recovery of the assessed amount. The petitioner had already filed an appeal and a stay application with the 2nd respondent, which were pending at the time the demand notice was issued. The court's intervention was sought to halt the enforcement of the demand notice until the appeal and stay application were considered.

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 754305 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 13-01-2020
• Assessment Year: misc
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM
• Assessee Lawyers: BABU NAIR; SMITHA BABU; P A RAJESH; SHAMSEERA ASHRAF; SUJIL
• Keywords: Demand notice; Income tax assessment; Stay Application; Writ of Certiorari; Writ of Mandamus

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS MONDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JANUARY 2020 / 23RD POUSHA, 1941 WP(C).No.657 OF 2020(F) PETITIONER/S: AVANANKUZHI SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.2387 AVANANKUZHI, NEYYATTINKARA TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, P.S.JAYASREE, W/O. BIJU RADHAKRISHNAN, AGED 50 YEARS, RESIDING AT VARUTHATTIL, MANGALATH KONAM, KATTACHALKUZHI P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.BABU S. NAIR SMT.SMITHA BABU SRI.P.A.RAJESH SMT.SHAMSEERA. C.ASHRAF SHRI.SUJIL C.S. RESPONDENTS: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(2), OFFICE OF THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE 2, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 003. 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AAYAAKR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 003. OTHER PRESENT: SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, STANDING COUNSEL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.01.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC No. 657 of 2020 2 ALEXANDER THOMAS, J. ======================== WP(C).NO.657 of 2020 ======================= Dated this the 13th day of January, 2020 J U D G M E N T The prayers in the above Writ Petition (Civil) are as follows: “ i) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writs, orders or directions, directing the 2nd respondent to consider Exhibit P5 application for stay and Ext. P4 appeal filed by the petitioner against Exhibit P2 assessment order for the assessment year 2017-18, forthwith. ii) Issue of a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, orders or directions, directing the 1st respondent not to recover the amounts as per Ext. P2 and P3, until Exhibit P4 appeal and Exhibit P5 application for stay filed by the petitioner, is considered by the 2nd respondent – Appellate Authority. ii) Grant such other reliefs as his Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. ” 2. Heard Sri. Babu S Nair learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.Christopher Abraham learned Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department, Government of India, appearing for the respondents. 3. Being aggrieved by impugned Ext.P2 assessment order, the petitioner has filed Ext.P4 appeal before the 2nd respondent Appellate Authority without delay and has also preferred Ext. P5 stay application in Ext.P4 appeal, which is also pending before the 2nd respondent Appellate Authority. The complaint of the petitioner is that, in the meanwhile, the 1st WPC No. 657 of 2020 3 respondent has caused to issue Ext.P3 demand notice for enforcement of the impugned Ext.P2 assessment order, when Ext. p4 appeal and Ext. P5 stay application are pending before the 2nd respondent Appellate Authority. 4. Taking note of the facts and circumstance of this case, it is ordered that the 2nd respondent Appellate Authority will take up for consideration Ext. P5 stay application, without any further delay and after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the petitioner, through authorised representative/counsel if any, will pass orders on the said stay application, within 2 months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order. Until orders are passed on Ext. P5 stay application as afore directed, further steps including Ext. P3 demand notice, for enforcement of the impugned Ext. P2 assessment order shall be kept in abeyance by the respondents concerned. With these observations and directions, the above Writ Petition (Civil) stands finally disposed of. (Sd/-) ALEXANDER THOMAS LU JUDGE WPC No. 657 of 2020 4 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE RETURNS FILED BY THE PETITIONER FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2017-18. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT DATED, 12.12.2019. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE OF DEMAND ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT DATED, 12.12.2019. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED, 1.1.2020 ALONG WITH THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF RECEIPT. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN EXHIBIT P4 APPEAL DATED, 2.1.2020 // True Copy // PA to Judge "