THE KOLAZHY SERVIE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.564 vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to consider and pass orders on the appeals filed by the petitioner within an outer time limit of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. The Court also ordered that recovery steps for the amounts confirmed by the assessment orders and further proceedings pursuant to the demand notices shall be kept in abeyance until such time as orders are passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and communicated to the petitioner. The petitioner was directed to furnish a copy of the writ petition and the judgment to the appellate authority for further action. The High Court did not decide on the merits of the Section 80P deduction claim.
What were the facts?
The petitioner, The Kolazhy Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. No. 564, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The petitioner had preferred appeals and stay petitions before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) against assessment orders and demand notices issued by the Income Tax Officer. The core issue in these appeals pertains to the deductibility under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, specifically concerning its applicability to Co-operative Societies. The petitioner sought a direction from the High Court to expedite the appellate process and stay recovery proceedings.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the High Court should direct the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to consider and pass orders on the pending appeals filed by the petitioner against assessment orders and demand notices, and in the interim, stay recovery proceedings? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the issue involved in their appeals is the permissibility of deduction under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act in its applicability to Co-operative Societies. They relied on similar orders passed by the High Court where it directed the appellate authority to consider appeals and stayed recovery proceedings. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the revenue's counsel.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
JUDGMENT Against Exts.P1, P5, P9 and P13 assessment orders under the Income Tax Act, the petitioner has preferred Exts.P3, P7, P11 and P15 appeals together with Exts.P4, P8, P12 and P16 stay petitions before the 1st respondent. Exts.P2, P6, P10 and P14 are the demand notices. It is submitted by counsel for the petitioner that the issue involved in the appeals is the permissibility of deduction under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act in its applicability to Co-operative Societies. It is pointed out that in similar matters this Court has directed the appellate authority to consider and pass orders in the appeal and stayed the recovery proceedings, in the meanwhile.
I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and also the learned Standing counsel appearing for the Income Tax Department. Taking note of similar orders issued by this Court, I dispose the Writ petition by directing the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on Exts.P3, P7, P11 and P15 appeals within an outer time limit of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner. Recovery steps for recovery of amounts confirmed against the petitioner by the assessment orders, as also further proceedings
WP(C).No.17685 OF 2020(I) 3 pursuant to Exts.P2, P6, P10 and P14 demand notices, shall be kept in abeyance till such time as orders are passed by the 1st respondent as directed, and the order communicated to the petitioner. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petition together with a copy of this judgment, before the 1st respondent, for further action. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
JUDGE mns
WP(C).No.17685 OF 2020(I) 4
Appendix — schedule of exhibits
More judgments on Section 80P
- Shree Bandharda Seva Sahkari Mandli Ltd… vs Income Tax Officer Ward -4, JunagadhITA 881/RJT/2025[2019-20]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Duddukuru Primary Agricultural Cooperative… vs ITO, Ward - 1, TadepalligudemITA 258/VIZ/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Parthasaradhi Mutually Aided Co-Operative… vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward-17(1), HyderabadITA 2322/HYD/2026[AY 2016-17]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026
- Jijamata Mahila Gramin Bigar Sheti Sahakari… vs ITO Ward -1, BhandraITA 102/NAG/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed12 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Shri Na vs Ari Khedut Sahkari Society Ltd…ITA 362/SRT/2025[2016-17]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2016-17
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Pradeep Kumar Behera vs. Superintendent CGST And Central Excise., CuttackOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Manas Behera vs. Commissioner, CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Pramod Kumar Nayak vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, KendraparaOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Nirmal Kumar Sharma S/O Ram Swroop Sharma vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 16 Oct 2026
- Sh Umang Uniyal vs. Commissioner Department Of Central Goods And Services TaxUttarakhand · 16 Oct 2026
