Aranattukara Oriental Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd. v. The Income-tax Officer Ward-2(1), Thrissur / The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Thrissur - 2019-LL-0927-62

Citation	2019-LL-0927-62
Appellant Name	Aranattukara Oriental Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd.
Respondent Name	The Income-tax Officer Ward-2(1), Thrissur / The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Thrissur
Court	HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Relevant Act	Income-tax
Date of Order	27/09/2019
Assessment Year	2016-17
Judgment	View Judgment
Keyword Tags	stay petition • granting of stay • stay of recovery
Bot Summary:	No.25831 OF 2019 -2- JUDGMENT Against Ext.P1 assessment order for the assessment year 2016- 2017 under the Income Tax Act, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P2 appeal together with Ext.P3 stay petition before the 2 nd respondent. In the stay petition, the 2nd respondent, by Ext.P5 order, directed a payment of 20 as a condition for grant of stay of the balance 80 that was demanded from the petitioner by Ext.P1 assessment order. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the issue relates to the deduction under Section 80P(2) of the Income Tax Act, and this Court has, in the decision reported in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Calicut 2019 KHC 287 FB resolved the issue in favour of the assessee. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and also the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Income Tax Department. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made across the Bar, I quash Ext.P5 order of the 2nd respondent, and direct the 2 nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P2 appeal within an outer time limit of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner. It is made clear that till such time as orders are passed by the 2nd respondent as directed, and the order communicated to the petitioner, recovery steps for recovery of amounts confirmed against the petitioner by Ext.P1 assessment order shall be kept in abeyance. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petition together with a copy of this judgment, before the 2nd respondent, for further action.

IN HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, 27TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2019 / 5TH ASWINA, 1941 WP(C).No.25831 OF 2019(D) PETITIONER: ARANATTUKARA ORIENTAL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.171,15/435, BIG BAZAR P. O., ARANATTUKARA, THRISSUR - 680618. REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MR. MANEESH K. BY ADVS. SRI.ANIL D. NAIR SRI.R.SREEJITH SHRI.GOKULRAJ L. SMT. ARYA ANIL SMT.SRI HARINI S.P. RESPONDENTS: 1 INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD - 2(1), THRISSUR - 680 001. 2 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) 3RD FLOOR, AAYKAR BHAVAN, THRISSUR - 680001. SRI. JOSE JOSEPH; SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27.09.2019, COURT ON SAME DAY DELIVERED FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.25831 OF 2019 -2- JUDGMENT Against Ext.P1 assessment order for assessment year 2016- 2017 under Income Tax Act, petitioner has preferred Ext.P2 appeal together with Ext.P3 stay petition before 2 nd respondent. In stay petition, 2nd respondent, by Ext.P5 order, directed payment of 20% as condition for grant of stay of balance 80% that was demanded from petitioner by Ext.P1 assessment order. It is submission of learned counsel for petitioner that issue relates to deduction under Section 80P(2) of Income Tax Act, and this Court has, in decision reported in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Calicut [2019 (2) KHC 287 [FB]] resolved issue in favour of assessee. 2. It is also brought to my notice that another Division Bench of this Court in writ appeal has directed First Appellate Authority to grant complete stay in all cases where tax demand arises consequent to disallowance of deduction under Section 80P(2) and where appeals are pending finalization before First Appellate Authority. WP(C).No.25831 OF 2019 -3- 3. I have heard learned counsel appearing for petitioner and also learned Standing Counsel appearing for Income Tax Department. 4. On consideration of facts and circumstances of case as also submissions made across Bar, I quash Ext.P5 order of 2nd respondent, and direct 2 nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P2 appeal within outer time limit of six months from date of receipt of copy of this judgment, after hearing petitioner. It is made clear that till such time as orders are passed by 2nd respondent as directed, and order communicated to petitioner, recovery steps for recovery of amounts confirmed against petitioner by Ext.P1 assessment order shall be kept in abeyance. petitioner shall produce copy of writ petition together with copy of this judgment, before 2nd respondent, for further action. writ petition is disposed as above. SD/- A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE SJ WP(C).No.25831 OF 2019 -4- APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 23.12.2018 FOR A.Y.2016-17 ISSUED TO PETITIONER BY 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF APPEAL FILED BEFORE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BEFORE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 1.7.2019 IN WRIT APPEAL NO.1536 OF 2019. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 26.8.2019 PASSED BY 2ND RESPONDENT. Aranattukara Oriental Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd. v. Income-tax Officer Ward-2(1), Thrissur / Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Thrissur

Metadata

Judgment