Case LawHigh Court › By Advs.harisankar v. Menonmeera V.menon

By Advs.harisankar v. Menonmeera V.menon

High Court 26 Oct 2021 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
By Advs.harisankar v. Menonmeera V.menon
Date of order
26 Oct 2021
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In By Advs.harisankar v. Menonmeera V.menon, the High Court (2021) decided the matter.

Decision: The writ petition is disposed of as above.

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 BECHU KURIAN THOMAS TUESDAY, THE 26 DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 4TH KARTHIKA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 22987 OF 2021 PETITIONER: KRISHNAN SARAVANAN 13/344, CHULLIMADA, KANJIKODE, PALAKKAD - 678621. BY ADVS.HARISANKAR V. MENONMEERA V.MENON RESPONDENTS: 1THE INCOME TAX OFFICERWARD 2, AYAKAR BHAVAN, PALAKKAD - 678014. 2THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPELAS) INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, SAKTHAN THAMPURAN NAGAR, THRISSUR - 680006. BY ADV.JOSE JOSEPH, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FORADMISSION ON 26.10.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAYDELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) No.22987/21 -:2:- BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J. ----------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.22987 of 2021 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 26[th] day of October, 2021 JUDGMENT Aggrieved by Ext.P1 order of assessment relating to assessmentyear 2017-18, petitioner has preferred an appeal before the 2[nd]respondent, a copy of which is produced as Ext.P2. A petition for stay ofproceedings pursuant to the assessment order has also been filed asExt.P3. Petitioner apprehends coercive proceedings to be effected evenbefore the petition for stay is considered. Hence this writ petition. 2. Having considered the submissions of the counsel for thepetitioner as well as the respondents, I am of the opinion that this writpetition itself can be disposed of with a direction. 3. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the appropriate appellateauthority to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3 stay petition, within aperiod of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.Till such a decision is taken, all coercive proceedings against thepetitioner shall be kept in abeyance. The writ petition is disposed of as above. SD/- BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE W.P.(C) No.22987/21 -:3:- APPENDIX OF WP(C) 22987/2021 PETITIONER'S/S' EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF ORDER ISSUED BY THE FIRSTRESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2017-18. EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONERBEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THEPETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
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