IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 11TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 20TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 27892 of 2010(J) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ----------------- THE PERUVALLUR SERVICE CO-OP. BANK LTD., NO.D.1979, REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT, PARAMBILPEEDIKA P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.U.K.DEVIDAS RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (CIB), OFFICE OF ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX(INV), KOZHIKODE. 2. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, KOZHIKODE. 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CIB), COCHIN, ERNAKULAM. 4. UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NEW DELHI. R1 TO 4 BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 27892 of 2010(J) ------------------------------------- APPENDIX ---------------- PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS -------------------------------------- EXT.P1. COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 18.09.2009 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXT.P2. COPY OF THE STAY ORDER IN SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL NO.3976 OF 2010 AND CONNECTED CASES. EXT.P3. COPY of the JUDGMENT DATED 29.03.2010 IN WP(C) NO.10717 OF 2010 OF 2010 RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL ------------------------------------- / TRUE COPY / P.A. TOJUDGE VK C.K. ABDUL REHIM, J ------------------------------- WP(C) NO. 27892 OF 2010 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of November, 2010 JUDGMENT A primary Agricultural Credit Society is the petitioner in this Writ Petition. Challenge is against Ext.P1 notice issued under Section 133 (6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, based on a contention that the petitioner will not come within the purview of 'person' as defined under the Income Tax Act. The matter now stands covered against the petitioner through decision of a Division Bench of this Court in W.A. No. 2333/2009 and connected cases. It was clarified in that judgment that notices similar to Ext.P1 can be issued with prior permission of the Director or Commissioner of the Income Tax, as the case may be. This Court directed that if such notices already issued does not disclose such prior permission, then the authority concerned can issue fresh notice after detaining such permission. But it is pointed out that the above said decision was taken up before the 2 WP(C) No. 27892/2010 Hon'ble Supreme Court and SLP (C) No. 3976/2010 filed in this regard stands admitted and an interim stay was already granted against operation of the judgment. Therefore I am of the opinion that the respondents are not justified in proceeding with Ext.P1 notice and further steps, pending disposal of the matter by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 2. In the above circumstances, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to keep in abeyance all further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P1, subject to final outcome of the matter pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. C.K. ABDUL REHIM JUDGE dnc