VILAPPIL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
What did the High Court hold?
The provided text is a procedural order listing the case for admission and does not contain any substantive findings or decisions by the Tribunal. Therefore, there is no decision on any issue, no reasoning, and no ratio decidendi. No operative directions were issued, and no issues were left undecided as the merits of the case were not addressed.
What were the facts?
The petitioner, Vilappil Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala challenging an order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(4), was the assessing authority. The third respondent is the Thiruvananthapuram District Co-operative Bank Ltd. The writ petition was filed seeking admission. The specific assessment year(s) and the nature of the dispute or the order under challenge are not detailed in the provided text. The procedural history is limited to the filing of the writ petition and its listing for admission.
What were the issues?
The provided text does not contain sufficient information to identify the specific issues the Tribunal had to decide, nor does it detail the arguments presented by the assessee or the revenue. Therefore, no questions of law or fact can be framed, and no contentions or reliance on authorities can be reported.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH 2015/6TH CHAITHRA, 1937 WP(C).No. 10053 of 2015 (F) ---------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- VILAPPIL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.2522, HEAD OFFICE, PEYAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY ANIL KUMAR.M, S/O.MADANAPPAN NAIR.
BY ADVS.SRI.BABU S. NAIR SMT.SMITHA BABU RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001. 2. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2(4), OFFICE OF THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX RNGE 2, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 003. 3. THE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., HEAD OFFICE, EAST FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER - 695 001.
R1 & R2 BY SRI.K.M.V.PANDALAI, CG R3 BY SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27-03-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: mbr/
WP(C).No. 10053 of 2015 (F) --------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: ------------------------------------ EXHIBIT P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DATED 27.3.2014. EXHIBIT P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 27.3.2014. EXHIBIT P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 28.4.2014. EXHIBIT P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 30.10.2014. EXHIBIT P5 : TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE BRANCH MANAGER OF THE PUTHANCHIRA BRANCH OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT BANK DATED 24.3.2015. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: - NIL -------------------------------------- /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE mbr/
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J. ................................................. W.P.(C) No. 10053 of 2015 (F) ............................................... Dated this the 27th day of March, 2015 JUDGMENT Against Ext.P1 assessment order passed under the Income Tax Act, 1961, petitioner preferred Ext.P3 appeal and Ext.P4 stay petition before the 1st respondent. It is the case of the petitioner that even before a consideration of the stay petition by the 2nd respondent, recovery steps are sought to be pursued for recovery of the amounts confirmed by Ext.P1 assessment order. 2. I have heard Sri.Babu S.Nair, learned counsel appearing for petitioner and Smt.Sobha Annamma Eappen, learned Government Pleader for the respondents. 3. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made across the Bar, I dispose the writ petition with a direction to the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P4 stay petition, preferred by the petitioner before him, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner. The order to be passed by the 2nd respondent shall contain reasons for the decision arrived at by him. Coercive steps for recovery of the amounts confirmed against
W.P.(C) No. 10053 of 2015 (F) 2 the petitioner by Ext.P1 assessment order including garnishee orders in the nature of Ext.P5, shall be kept in abeyance till such time as the 1st respondent passes orders, as directed above, and communicates the same to the petitioner. Sd/- A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
JUDGE AMV/28/03/
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Jack And Jill vs. The Union Of INDIA And OrsGauhati · 5 Nov 2026
- Ms Akher Ali vs. The Union Of INDIAGauhati · 5 Nov 2026
- Paonta Hp Centre vs. State Of Hp And OthersHimachal Pradesh · 5 Nov 2026
- M/S Multitech Agro INDIA (Opc) PVT LTD vs. The State Of KarnatakaKarnataka · 5 Nov 2026
- Gopa Satya Madhava Subbarao vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 5 Nov 2026