THE THRISSUR DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS MONDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF JANUARY 2020 / 7TH MAGHA, 1941 WP(C).No.2194 OF 2020(Y) PETITIONER: THE THRISSUR DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., THRISSUR, SAHAKARANA SATABDHI MANDIRAM, KOVILAKATHUMPADAM, THRISSUR - 680022, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER. BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC, THRISSUR DISTRICT CO.OPERATIVE BANK LTD. RESPONDENTS: 1 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) THRISSUR - 680 001. 2 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 2(1), AYAKAR BHAVAN, SAKTHAN THAMPURAN NAGAR, THRISSUR - 680 001. 3 THE STATE BANK OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER, MAIN BRANCH, THRISSUR - 680 001. OTHER PRESENT: SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC FOR R1, R2, SRI.JAICE JACOB FOR R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27.01.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

W.P.(C)No.2194/2020 2 ALEXANDER THOMAS, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.2194 of 2020 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of January, 2020 JUDGMENT Against Ext.P1 assessment order, the petitioner has filed Ext.P4 appeal along with Ext.P- 5 stay petition. The petitioner's grievance is that during the pendency of the stay petition, coercive recovery proceedings have been initiated by the assessing authority for recovery of the disputed amounts. 2. Heard Sri.P.C. Sasidharan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri. Jose Joseph, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondents 1 and 2 and Sri. Jaice Jacob, learned counsel appearing for R3. 3. After hearing both sides and after taking note of the facts and circumstances of the case, it is ordered in the interest of justice that the 1st respondent shall take up the matters in Ext.P5 stay application filed in Ext.P-4 appeal and after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the petitioner through their authorised representative/ counsel, if any, shall pass orders on the stay application without much delay, preferably within a

W.P.(C)No.2194/2020 3 period of two months from the date of production of a certified copy of this judgment. Until orders are thus passed on the abovesaid stay application, further coercive steps for enforcement of the impugned order will be kept in abeyance. With these observations and directions, the above Writ Petition (Civil) stands finally disposed of. Sd/ ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE. acd

W.P.(C)No.2194/2020 4 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 16.12.2019. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPUTATION SHEET. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 31.12.2019. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 31.12.2019. EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C) 9506 OF 2019 DATED 27.3.2019.