High Court of KeralaWP(C)/17679/2015disposed of

Tushar Jayanthilal Jain v. Income Tax Officer

2015-06-12Honourable Mr. Justice A.Muhamed Mustaque3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE FRIDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF JUNE 2015/22ND JYAISHTA, 1937 WP(C).No. 17679 of 2015 (H) ---------------------------- PETITIONER :

---------------------- TUSHAR JAYANTHILAL JAIN, 40/6110, PUSHYARAG, GOPALAPRABHU ROAD, KOCHI -682 035 BY ADVS.SRI.ANIL D. NAIR SRI.R.SREEJITH SMT.ROSIE ATHULYA JOSEPH SMT.O.A.NURIYA RESPONDENT(S):

----------------------------

1. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON-CORPORATE, WARD 1 (2), KOCHI -682 018

2. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)-III, ERNAKULAM- 682 016 BY SRI.K.M.V.PANDALAI, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM,SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12-06-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

sts

WP(C).No. 17679 of 2015 (H) ----------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 28-03-2015 FOR THE A.Y (2012-2013) ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 28/4/15 EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION U/S. 220(6) FILED BEFORE FIRST RESPONDENT DATED 29/4/15 EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 27/5/2015 PASSED BY FIRST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 9/6/15 RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:

NIL ----------------------------------------- /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE sts

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.

------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.17679 of 2015 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 12th day of June, 2015

J U D G M E N T

The petitioner has filed Ext.P2 appeal along with Ext.P5 stay application against the assessment order passed by the 1st respondent. In the meanwhile, vide Ext.P4 order, the assessing authority directed the petitioner to remit 50% of the demand for not proceeding with recovery steps.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. Considering the fact that, the petitioner has already moved the stay application, this writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider the stay application within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after notice to the petitioner. Till disposal of the stay application, all recovery proceedings against the petitioner shall be deferred. The petitioner is also directed to produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of this writ petition before the 2nd respondent for compliance.

Sd/- A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE.