PALLICKAL FARMERS SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO. T. 230 V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/8249/2018

AI Insights

The case involves the Pallickal Farmers Service Co-operative Bank Ltd, which is the petitioner, and the Income Tax Officer and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) as respondents. The petitioner challenged the delay in the decision-making process regarding their stay applications on the assessment orders for the years 2008-2009 and 2015-2016. The petitioner had filed appeals against these orders and sought stays on the realization of the assessed amounts. The core issue was the delay by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in deciding on these stay applications, which the petitioner argued was causing immediate financial harm due to the initiation of realization proceedings.

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 758735 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 12-03-2018
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: WP(C) No. 38566 of 2017
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM
• Assessee Lawyers: V G ARUN; T R HARIKUMAR; JAIBY PAUL; ARJUN RAGHAVAN; ADITHYA RAJEEV
• Keywords: Assessment Order; Income Tax; Realisation of amounts; Stay Petition

Judgement Text

" IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR MONDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH 2018 / 21ST PHALGUNA, 1939 WP(C).No. 8249 of 2018 PETITIONER(S) PALLICKAL FARMERS SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO. T. 230, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR,PALLICKAL, KILIMANOOR.P.O,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695604. BY ADVS.SRI.V.G.ARUN SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR SRI.JAIBY PAUL SRI.ARJUN RAGHAVAN SRI.ADITHYA RAJEEV RESPONDENT(S): 1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-2(5), OFFICE OF THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-2,AAYAKAR BHAVAN,KOWDIAR.P.O,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695003. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS), AAYAKAR BHAVAN,KOWDIAR,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695003. R BY SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12-03-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 8249 of 2018 (E) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 19.03.2014,ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE(GENERAL),CHIRAYINKEEZHU. EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2008-2009 DATED 22.03.2014. EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 22.03.2014. EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2015-2016 DATED 12.12.2017. EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPELLATE ORDER IN ITA NO.16/CIT(A),TVM/2015-16 DATED 04.05.2016. EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM FILED AGAINST EXT.P2 ASSESSMENT ORDER ALONG WITH COVERING LETTER DATED 10.04.2014. EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.AAAAP4843P/W-2(5)/TVM/2017-18 DATED 14.02.2018 EXHIBIT P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.AAAAP4843P/W-2(5)/TVM/2017-18 DATED 15.02.2018. EXHIBIT P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 10.02.2018,FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN EXT-P6 APPEAL EXHIBIT P10 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM FILED AGAINST EXT.P4 ASSESSMENT ORDER ALONG WITH COVERING LETTER DATED 10.02.2018 EXHIBIT P11 A TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 10.02.2018,FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN EXT.P10 APPEAL. EXHIBIT P12 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 21.12.2017 IN WP(C)NO.38566 OF 2017. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL //TRUE COPY// sd/- P.A. TO JUDGE SKS P .B.SURESH KUMAR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P .(C).No.8249 of 2018 = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 12th 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.P2 and P4 assessment orders, the petitioner preferred Exts.P6 and P10 appeals before the second respondent. Exts.P9 and P11 are the applications for stay preferred by the petitioner in the appeals. The grievance of the petitioner in the writ petition concerns the delay on the part of the second respondent in passing orders on the applications for stay. It is pointed out that in the light of Ext.P12 judgment rendered by this Court in a matter challenging the order passed in a stay petition preferred in an identical appeal, the petitioner is entitled to an absolute stay in the matter. It is alleged by the petitioner in the writ petition that proceedings have already been initiated for realisation of the amounts covered by the assessment orders. The petitioner, therefore, seeks appropriate directions in this regard, in this writ petition. W.P. (c) No. 8249/2018 -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 the applications for stay, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Ordered accordingly. This shall be done having regard to Ext.P12 judgment rendered by this Court. Needless to say that until orders are passed on the applications for stay, further proceedings for realisation of the amounts covered by the assessment orders referred to above shall be deferred. sd/- P .B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE. SKS "