THE ALATHUR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK V. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)

WP(C)/7415/2018

AI Insights

The case involves The Alathur Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., the petitioner, who is an assessee under the Income Tax Act, contesting an assessment order issued by the Income Tax Officer, the second respondent. The petitioner filed an appeal against the assessment order and simultaneously requested a stay on the realization of the assessed amounts. The writ petition was filed due to the delay by the second respondent in deciding on the stay application, which the petitioner argued was causing premature realization of the assessed amounts. The court's decision focused on expediting the decision on the stay application and halting further actions on the assessment order until the stay application was resolved.

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 767670 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 09-04-2018
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: 2016(2) KHC 726 DB
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: JOSE JOSEPH
• Assessee Lawyers: P N MOHAN; C P SABARI
• Keywords: Assessment Order; Income Tax; Realisation of amounts; Stay Application
• Section: 156

Judgement Text

" IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR MONDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2018 / 19TH CHAITHRA, 1940 WP(C).No. 7415 of 2018 PETITIONER(S) THE ALATHUR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO. F. 1222 REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, ALATHUR, ALATHUR POST, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678541.. BY ADVS.SRI.P.N.MOHANAN SRI.C.P.SABARI RESPONDENT(S): 1. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AAYAKAR BYHAVAN, SAKTHAN THAMPURAN RANGAR, THRISSUR-680 001. 2. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD NO.-5, PALAKKAD, OFFICE OF THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PALAKKAD RANGE, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, E.C. ROAD, PALAKKAD-678 014. R BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09-04-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 7415 of 2018 (B) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE PRE-ASSESSMENT NOTICE DATED 22.11.2016 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED 2.12.2016 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER SOCIETY. EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 14.12.2016 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 19.12.2016 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-2012. EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 19.12.2016 U/S 156 OF THE IT ACT. EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 19.12.2016 BEFORE IMPOSING PENALTY ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN 2016(2) KHC 726 DB. EXHIBIT P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL PETITION DATED 17.1.2017 FILED BY THE PETITIONER THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXHIBITP9 A TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 20-03-2018 PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT // true copy // Sd/- PS TO JUDGE Kvs/- P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C).No.7415 of 2018 = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 9th day of April, 2018 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is an assessee under the Income Tax Act (the Act) on the rolls of the first respondent. Aggrieved by Ext.P4 assessment order, the petitioner preferred Ext.P8 appeal before the second respondent. Ext.P9 is the application for stay preferred by the petitioner in Ext.P8 appeal. The grievance of the petitioner in the writ petition concerns the delay on the part of the second respondent in passing orders on Ext.P9 application 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 Ext.P4 order. The petitioner, therefore, seeks appropriate directions in this regard, in this writ petition. 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 WPC.No.7415 of 2018 2 directing the second respondent to take a decision on Ext.P9 application 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 Ext.P9 application for stay, further proceedings for realisation of the amounts covered by Ext.P4 assessment order shall be deferred. Sd/- P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE. Kvs/- // true copy // "