Case LawHigh Court › By Adv. Sri.harisankar v. Menon

By Adv. Sri.harisankar v. Menon

High Court 02 Jun 2020 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
By Adv. Sri.harisankar v. Menon
Date of order
02 Jun 2020
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In By Adv. Sri.harisankar v. Menon, the High Court (2020) decided the matter.

Decision: 2.Having heard the learned counsel on both sides, thewrit petition is disposed of with a direction to the secondrespondent to take a decision on Ext.P2 appeal in accordancewith law, after affording an opportunity of hearing to thepetitioner, within a period of three months from the date ofreceipt of...

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL TUESDAY, THE 02ND DAY OF JUNE 2020 / 12TH JYAISHTA, 1942 WP(C).No.10758 OF 2020 PETITIONER/S: THE THALORE SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTDI-269, THALORE, THRISSUR-680 306, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, T.V. SHAJKUMAR, AGED 46, S/O. VELAYUDHAN. BY ADV. SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON RESPONDENT/S: 1THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(5), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, THRISSUR-680 001. 2THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)SAKTHAN NAGAR, THRISSUR-680 021. OTHER PRESENT: SRI JOSE JOSEPH SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON02.06.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT Dated this the 2[nd] day of June 2020 Petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to dispose of Ext.P2 appeal preferred before the secondrespondent/Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) against theassessment order Ext.P1. 2.Having heard the learned counsel on both sides, thewrit petition is disposed of with a direction to the secondrespondent to take a decision on Ext.P2 appeal in accordancewith law, after affording an opportunity of hearing to thepetitioner, within a period of three months from the date ofreceipt of a copy of this judgment without insisting onpayment of 20% of the tax demanded, as per circular of 2017.Till such time a decision is taken on the appeal, recoveryproceedings pursuant to the assessment order shall be kept inabeyance. Sd/- AMIT RAWAL JUDGE APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2017-18 DATED12.12.2019. EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT 2017-18 DATED 10.1.2020. EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT 2017-18 DATED 30.1.2020. EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF JUDGMENT IN WPC NO.4366/2020 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT DATED 17.2.2020. EXHIBIT P4 (A) COPY OF JUDGMENT IN WP(C) TMP NO.261/2020OF THIS HON'BLE COURT DATED 5.5.2020.
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation. Full disclaimer & Terms.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan