Kerala High Court
The Thalappalam Service Co-Operative ... vs Union Of India on 10 December, 2013
Author: P.R. Ramachandra Menon
Bench: P.R.Ramachandra Menon
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALAATERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
FRIDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2014/9TH PHALGUNA, 1935
WP(C).No. 3532 of 2014 (N)
----------------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
--------------------------
1. THE THALAPPALAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.
PLASSANAL, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, KOTTAYAM
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
2. THE MANJOOR SERVICE CO-OPERARTIVE BANK LTD
KURUPPANTHARA, MANJOOR PO, KOTTAYAM
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
3. THE MELUKAVU SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD
MELUKAVU MATTOM, KOTTAYAM, PIN 686 652
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
4. THE MOONILAVU SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD
MOONNILAVU , KOTTAYAM, PIN 686 586
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
5. THE NEELOOR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD
NEELOOR PO, KOTTAYAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
6. THE TEEKOY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD
TEEKOY, KOTTAYAM, PIN 686 580
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
7. THE MEENACHIL TALUK CO-OPERATIVE EMPLOYEES CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD
PALA, KOTTAYAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
8. THE POONJAR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVEBANK LTD
POONJAR, KOTTAYAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
BY ADV. SRI.A.KUMAR
RESPONDENT(S):
----------------------------
1. UNION OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY MINISTRY OF FINANCE
NEW DELHI 110 001
WP(C).No. 3532 of 2014 (N) - 2 -
2. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
KOTTAYAM 686 001.
3. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (INTELLIGENCE)
KOCHI 682 018
4. INCOME TAX OFFICER(INTELLIGENCE)
NAVARATNAM, VELLAKINAR, ALAPPUZHA 688 001
BY SRI. JOSE JOSEPH, STANDING COUNSEL, FOR INCOME TAX
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28-02-2014,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 3532 of 2014 (N)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-------------------------------------
EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF THE NOTICES ISSUED TO THE PETITIONERS
EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION ADDRESSED TO THE UNION FINANCE
MINISTRY DATED 10/12/2013
EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 22/1/2014
EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION ADDRESSED TO THE UNION FINANCE
MINISTRY DATED 18/12/2013
EXHIBIT P5 COPY OF THE PETITIONER'S REPRESENTATION TO THE UNION FINANCE
MINISTRY DATED 18/12/2013
EXHIBIT P6 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC NO.31579/2006 DATED 29/11/2006
EXHIBIT P7 COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION ADDRESSED TO THE FINANCE
SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA DATED 04/02/2014.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS
---------------------------------------
NIL.
// TRUE COPY //
P.A. TO JUDGE
sou.
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
W.P.(C) No. 3532 of 2014
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dated, this the 28th day of February, 2014
JUDGMENT
The petitioners, who are Co-operative Societies registered under the relevant provisions of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969, are before this Court, challenging the correctness and sustainability of Ext.P1 series notices issued by the 4th respondent under Section 133(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Various grounds have been raised with regard to the correctness and sustainability of the said proceedings.
2. The learned standing counsel for the respodents submits that the issue stands answered against the petitioners, as per the decision rendered in Alanallur Service Co.op Bank Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax [(2004) 186 CTR 310 (Ker.)] and the position has been affirmed by the Apex Court in [2014] 360 ITR 243 (SC) [Kathiroor Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (CIB) and others].
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that, the limited relief now sought for is only to cause the grievance projected by the petitioners by way of Ext. P7 representation to be considered W.P.(C) No. 3532 of 2014 : 2 : within a reasonable time. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that the greivance has already been exposed by way of various representations/communications before the concerned Ministry and such other authorities as borne by Exts. P2 to P5 and that some alternate suggestions are also been made therein with regard to the necessity to enhance the ceiling as to the cut off figures.
4. After hearing both the sides, this Court finds it fit and proper to grant one month's time to the petitioner to satisfy the requirement in Ext.P1. The first respondent is directed to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext. P7 in accordance with the relevant provisions of law and the judidical precedents, as expeditiously as possible.
The writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, (JUDGE) kmd