Kerala High Court
The Edathiruthy Service ... vs The Commissioner Of Income Tax ... on 23 September, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
THURSDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 1ST ASWINA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 19856 OF 2021
PETITIONER:
THE EDATHIRUTHY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO F
1045
KODUNGALLUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 703,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
BY ADV O.D.SIVADAS
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)
AYAKAR BHAVAN, SHAKTAN NAGAR, THRISSUR, PIN-680 001.
2 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,
WARD 2(1), SHAKTAN NAGAR, THRISSUR, PIN-680 001.
SRI. JOSE JOSEPH, STANDING COUNSEL
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 23.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 19856 OF 2021
-2-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
===============================
W.P.(C) No.19856 of 2021
===============================
Dated this the 23rd day of September, 2021
JUDGMENT
Petitioner is a co-operative society, who
claimed the benefit under Section 80P(4) of the
Income Tax Act. By the order dated 17.12.2019, the
assessing officer completed the assessment under
Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act and disallowed
the claim under Section 80P(2) of the Act. A demand
for a huge amount has already been made against the
petitioner.
2. Challenging the order of assessment,
petitioner has preferred an appeal before the first
respondent. The said appeal is produced as Ext.P2.
It is submitted that the appeal is pending
consideration. However, apprehending coercive steps
that may be initiated, pursuant to Ext.P1
WP(C) NO. 19856 OF 2021
assessment order, petitioner seeks for a direction
for an early disposal of Ext.P2 appeal.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the
petitioner Adv.O.D.Sivadas as well as the learned
Standing Counsel for the respondents Sri.Jose
Joseph.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner
pointed out that there are connected matters in
which this Court has already issued directions to
the Appellate Authority to dispose of appeals in
cases where the deduction under Section 80P of the
Act have been sought without insisting on any
deposit. Ext.P3 is one such judgment where this
Court directed the appeal to be disposed of without
insisting on payment of any percentage of the
amount already assessed.
5. Having regard to the circumstances arising
in the case, I am of the view that the appeal filed
by the petitioner as Ext.P2 before the first
respondent can be directed to be disposed of in
WP(C) NO. 19856 OF 2021
accordance with law.
Accordingly, there will be a direction to the
Appellate Authority concerned to dispose of Ext.P2
appeal, after affording an opportunity of hearing
to the petitioner within an outer period of six
months from the date of receipt of a copy of this
judgment. It is clarified that the appeal shall be
disposed of by the 1st respondent without insisting
on payment of 20% of the tax demanded. Needless to
say, till a decision is taken by the 1st respondent
on the appeal, all recovery proceedings pursuant to
assessment order shall be kept in abeyance.
The writ petition is allowed as above.
Sd/-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
JUDGE
hmh
WP(C) NO. 19856 OF 2021
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 19856/2021
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED
17.12.2019 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
FOR THE ASSESSMENT PERIOD 2017-18
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE
PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT
FOR THE PERIOD 2017-18 DATED 16.1.2020
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
6.9.2021 IN WPC NO 18004 OF 2021
RENDERED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT
RESPONDENT NIL
EXHIBITS
