Karthedom Rural Co-Operative ... vs The Income Tax Officer
2022 Latest Caselaw 12392 Ker

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
                 THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
     FRIDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 2ND POUSHA, 1944
                        WP(C) NO. 42523 OF 2022
PETITIONER/S:

          KARTHEDOM RURAL CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.NO.385
          KARTHEDOM, MALIPURAM, KOCHI
          ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682511
          BY ADVS.
          M.SASINDRAN
          SREEHARI INDUKALADHARAN


RESPONDENT/S:

    1     THE INCOME TAX OFFICER
          THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,
          NON CORP WARD 2(4) AND TPS KOCHI,
          CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING,
          I.S. PRESS ROAD, KACHERIPADY,
          KOCHI, KERALA., PIN - 682018
    2     THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)
          THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS),
          NATIONAL FACELESS APPEALS CENTRE (NFAC)
          NEW DELHI., PIN - 110001
          BY ADV JOSE JOSEPH



          SC - Sri.Christopher Abraham


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
23.12.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 42523 OF 2022                2



                                 JUDGMENT

Petitioner is a Primary Agricultural Credit Society

registered under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969.

Ex.P2 order of assessment was issued against the petitioner on

30.03.2022, for the assessment year 2015-16. In the

assessment order, petitioner's claim for deduction under

Section 80P was rejected on the ground that there was no

evidence to show that petitioner satisfied the ingredients of

the Primary Agricultural Credit Society as contemplated under

the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act.

2. While assailing the assessment order before the 2nd

respondent, petitioner has sought to canvass that the

judgment of the Supreme Court in Mavilayi Service Co-

operative Bank Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax

[2021 (1) KLT 485] now governs the field thereby rendering

the assessment itself as incorrect.

3. Since the petitioner has already preferred an appeal as

Ext.P4 and the same is pending consideration before the 2nd

respondent, I deem it fit that this writ petition be disposed of,

directing the Appellate Authority to consider the appeal in a

time bound manner.

4. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 2nd

respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P4

as expeditiously as possible.

5. Till the disposal of the appeal, no coercive steps shall

be initiated against the petitioner pursuant to Ext.P2

assessment order and Ext.P3 demand notice.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

GOPINATH P.

JUDGE ajt

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 42523/2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION DATED 21.12.2015 ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, ERNAKULAM Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2015-2016 DATED 30.03.2022 Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE NO.ITBA/AST/S/156/2021-22/1042161498(1) DATED 30.03.2022 Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 06.07.2022 Exhibit P4(a) A TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 16.06.2022 Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 19.07.2019 IN W.A.NO.1639/2019