M/S. KUMARANELLUR CO-OPERATIVE SERVICE BANK LTD V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/9566/2018

AI Insights

The case involves M/s. Kumaranellur Co-operative Service Bank Ltd, the petitioner, who is an assessee under the Income Tax Act, contesting the delay in the decision-making process regarding their stay applications on assessment orders issued by the Income Tax Officer, Ward - 3, Palakkad, and the subsequent appeal to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The petitioner had filed appeals against the assessment orders for the assessment years 2014-15 and 2015-16, along with stay applications, which were allegedly delayed, prompting the writ petition. The court's intervention was sought to expedite the decision on these stay applications to prevent further realization proceedings on the disputed amounts.

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 765925 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 20-03-2018
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: JOSE JOSEPH
• Assessee Lawyers: T M SREEDHARAN; V P NARAYANAN
• Keywords: Assessment Order; Income Tax; Realisation of amounts; Stay Application
• Section: 220(6)

Judgement Text

" IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR TUESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF MARCH 2018 / 29TH PHALGUNA, 1939 WP(C).No. 9566 of 2018 PETITIONER M/S. KUMARANELLUR CO-OPERATIVE SERVICE BANK LTD NO.F.970, KUMARANELLUR POST, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 679 552. REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, SHRI. M.A. SREENIVASAN. BY ADVS.SRI.T.M.SREEDHARAN (SR.) SRI.V.P.NARAYANAN RESPONDENTS: 1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3, PALAKKAD - 678 001. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AAYAKAR BHAWAN, SAKTHAN THAMPURAN NAHAR, THRISSUR - 680 001. BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20-03-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 9566 of 2018 (U) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF ASST.ORDER DATED 21.12.2016 ALONG WITH DEMAND NOTICE FOR THE ASST.YEAR 2014-15 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 23.01.2017 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR AY-2014-15. EXHIBIT P2(A) TRUE COPY OF STAY PETITION DATED 23.01.2017 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR AY-2014-15. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ASST.ORDER AND DEMAND NOTICE FOR THE ASST.YEAR DATED 29.11.2017 FOR AY 2015-16 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 04.01.2018 FOR THE ASST.YEAR 2015-16 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4(A) TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 04.01.2018 FOR THE ASST.YEAR 2015-16 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FILED U/S.220(6) OF THE ACT DATED 23.01.2017 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE ASST.YEAR 2014-15. EXHIBIT P5(A) TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FILED U/S.220(6) OF THE ACT DATED 04.01.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE ASST.YEAR 2015-16. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:NIL //TRUE COPY// SD/- PA TO JUDGE rsr P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.9566 of 2018 --------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of March, 2018 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is an assessee under the Income T ax Act (the Act) on the rolls of the first respondent. Aggrieved by Exts.P1 and P3 assessment orders, the petitioner preferred Exts.P2 and P4 appeals before the second respondent. Exts.P2(a) and P4(a) are the applications for stay preferred by the petitioner in Exts.P2 and P4 appeals. The grievance of the petitioner in the writ petition concerns the delay on the part of the second respondent in passing orders on Exts.P2(a) and P4(a) applications for stay. It is alleged by the petitioner in the writ petition that proceedings have already been initiated for realisation of the amounts covered by Exts.P1 and P3 orders. The petitioner, therefore, seeks appropriate directions in this regard, in this writ petition. W.P.(c).No.9566 of 2018 : 2 : 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the second respondent to take a decision on Exts.P2(a) and P4(a) applications for stay, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say that until orders are passed on Exts.P2(a) and P4(a) applications for stay, further proceedings for realisation of the amounts covered by Exts.P1 and P3 assessment orders shall be deferred. Sd/- P.B.SURESH KUMAR JUDGE rsr "