Disposed

Primary Agricultural Credit Co. Operative Society Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)

Karnataka HC9 Feb 2023WP/2365/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of this writ petition directing the Assessing Officer (Respondent 2) to consider the petitioner's application for stay within three months and restraining respondents from coercive measures until such decision.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Assessing Officer to consider the petitioner's application for stay within three months and restrain respondents from taking any coercive measures.

Primary Agricultural Credit Co. Operative… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

WP No. 2365 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 2365 OF 2023 (T-IT)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD FARMER SERVICE CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD REGISTERED UNDER KCS ACT 1959 MOSALE HOSAHALLI, MOSALE HOSAHALLI POST -573212 HASSAN TALUK AND DISTRICT REP BY ITS C.E.O. VIJAYA KUMAR AGE 43 YEARS

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. MAHESH R UPPIN.,ADVOCATE)

¶11

Digitally signed by NARASIMHA MURTHY VANAMALA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

AND:

¶13

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE ROOM NO. 356 C R BUILDING I P ESTATE NEW DELHI -110002

¶14

ASSESSING OFFICER NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE DELHI -110002

¶15

¶16

WP No. 2365 of 2023

¶17

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -2 AAYAKAR BHAVAN 2ND STAGE BELUR ROAD HASSAN -573201

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SRI. E.I.SANMATHI, ADVOCATE)

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-1 TO DISPOSE OFF THE APPEAL ANNEXURE-C DATED 18/10/2022 FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN THE E- PORTAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF THREE MONTHS AND TILL THE DISPOSAL OF THE SAID APPEAL, NOT TO MAKE ANY DEMAND OF INCOME TAX FROM THE PETITIONER OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE DIRECT THE R-3 TO FORWARD THE APPLICATION FILED UNDER ANNEXURE-E DATED 19/10/2022 TO THE R-2 AND IN TURN DIRECT THE R-2 TO CONSIDER THE SAID APPLICATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND TILL THE DISPOSAL OF THE SAID APPLICATION NOT TO RECOVER THE TAX UNDER DEMAND.

¶21

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

¶23

WP No. 2365 of 2023

¶24

ORDER

¶25

The petitioner has filed this petition for a direction to the first respondent to dispose of the petitioner’s appeal [Annexure-C] within a timeline, or in the alternative, has sought for directions to the second respondent to consider his application for stay [Annexure-E] with a direction to the second respondent not to take any action until such application for stay is considered.

¶26

Sri. Mahesh R Uppin, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that in similar circumstances this Court has disposed of the writ petition in W.P.No.22913/2022 by order dated 09.12.2022 directing the Appellate Authority to dispose of the appeal expeditiously with simultaneous direction to the second respondent to consider the application for stay and pass suitable orders in accordance with law within a period of three [3] weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order with a further direction

¶27

¶28

WP No. 2365 of 2023

¶29

that no precipitative or coercive measures shall be taken. As such, this Court may consider passing similar orders in this petition.

¶30

Sri E I Sanmathi, the learned Standing counsel for the respondents, who is called upon to accept notice, submits that this Court could consider directing the second respondent to consider the petitioner’s application for stay [Annexure-E] within three [3] months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order and also the petitioner’s request for directions for expeditious disposal of the appeal.

¶31

In the light of the above, the petition stands disposed of directing the second respondent – the Assessing Officer to consider the petitioner’s application for stay [Annexure-E] within a period of three [3] months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order strictly in accordance with law and until such decision, the respondents are restrained from taking any coercive measures against the

¶32

¶33

WP No. 2365 of 2023

¶34

petitioner. It would be open to the petitioner to seek expeditious disposal of the appeal before the Appellate Authority.

¶35

Sd/JUDGE

¶36

Primary Agricultural Credit Co. Operative Society Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Primary Agricultural Credit Co. Operative Society Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri. Raghavendra N. a. Vs State of Karnataka

Rathnsingh Naik Vs the Director (a and H R)

Sri M S Shadakashari Vs State of Karnataka

Mr Shawar Pasha Vs the Superintendent

Aramanamada Biddappa Krishna Vs National Faceless Assessment Centre

Byndoor Vyavasaya Seva Sahakari Sangha Niyamitha Vs Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)