THE VEMBAYAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO. 3121 vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER
What did the High Court hold?
The provided text is an excerpt from the cause list and does not contain the judgment or the decision of the High Court. Therefore, what the High Court decided, the reasoning behind its decision, and the operative directions are not available. No specific issue was decided, and no ratio decidendi can be extracted from this text. The judgment does not record any findings on the merits of the case, nor does it provide any relief to the petitioner or dismiss the petition. The text only indicates that the writ petition was listed for admission hearing.
What were the facts?
The petitioner, The Vembayam Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. No. 3121, represented by its Secretary, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The petition challenges an order or action by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3), and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The assessment year(s) and the specific order or action under challenge are not explicitly detailed in the provided text. The amount in dispute is also not stated. The procedural history leading to this writ petition is not elaborated upon, other than the fact that it has reached the stage of admission hearing before the High Court.
What were the issues?
The primary issue before the High Court appears to be the legality or validity of the action taken by the Income Tax Officer and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) against the petitioner. The specific grounds for challenge are not detailed in the provided text. The petitioner, represented by advocates Sri. V.G. Arun and Sri. T.R. Harikumar, is seeking relief from the High Court. The respondent, the Income Tax Officer, is represented by Sri. Christopher Abraham. The arguments presented by each side, including any reliance on specific provisions of the Income Tax Act, circulars, or case law, are not recorded in the provided excerpt.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Heard together (2 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR MONDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH 2018 / 21ST PHALGUNA, 1939 WP(C).No. 8290 of 2018 PETITIONER(S) THE VEMBAYAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO. 3121 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, KONCHIRA P.O, VEMBAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT 695 615 BY ADVS.SRI.V.G.ARUN SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): 1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2(3),OFFICE OF THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-2, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT 695 003 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 003 R BY SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12-03-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 8290 of 2018 (I) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 12-12-2014,ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES(GENERAL), NEDUMANGAD EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2011-2012 DATED 18-12-2017 EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 18-12-2017 EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO. AAAAV4391G/ITO/W-2(3)/TVM/2017-18 DATED 09-02-2018 EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM FILED AGAINST EXT P2 ASSESSMENT ORDER ALONG WITH COVERING LETTER DATED 10-02-2018. EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 10-02-2018,FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN EXT-P5 APPEAL. EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 21-12-2017 IN WP(C) NO 38566 OF 2017 RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL //TRUE COPY// SD/- P.A. TO JUDGE SKS
P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C).No. 8290 of 2018 = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 12th day of March, 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.P2 assessment order, the petitioner preferred Ext.P5 appeal before the second respondent. Ext.P6 is the application for stay preferred by the petitioner in Ext.P5 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.P6 application for stay. It is pointed out that in the light of Ext.P7 judgment rendered by this Court in a matter challenging the order passed in a stay petition preferred in an identical appeal, the petitioner is entitled to an absolute stay in the matter. It is alleged by the petitioner in the writ petition that proceedings have already been initiated for realisation of the amounts covered by Ext.P2 assessment order. The petitioner, therefore, seeks appropriate directions in this
W.P. (c) No. 8290/2018
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 directing the second respondent to take a decision on Ext.P6 application for stay, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Ordered accordingly. This shall be done having regard to Ext.P7 judgment rendered by this Court. Needless to say that until orders are passed on Ext.P6 application for stay, further proceedings for realisation of the amounts covered by Ext.P2 assessment order shall be deferred. sd/- P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE. SKS
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Archana Agro, Nayagarh vs. The Chief Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes And Goods And Services Tax, CuttackOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- M/S.Shree Jagannath Associates, Angul vs. The Chief Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes And Goods And Services Tax, CuttackOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- Sampat Raj Jain vs. The State Of Assam And 3 Ors.Gauhati · 3 Nov 2026
- Sri Hardik Gowda vs. Sri Jayaram PKarnataka · 3 Nov 2026
- Shiv Ram vs. State Of Hp And OrsHimachal Pradesh · 3 Nov 2026