By Advs.harisankar v. Menonmeera V.menon
High Court
17 May 2022 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
By Advs.harisankar v. Menonmeera V.menon
Date of order
17 May 2022
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 (2022) 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 ERNAKULAMPRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.
TUESDAY, THE 17 DAY OF MAY 2022 / 27TH VAISAKHA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 16024 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
KALLUMALA AGRICULTURAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.N.H.W.14, KALLUMALA P.O., MAVELIKKARA, ALAPPUZHA-690 110, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, BINDU.A.
BY ADVS.HARISANKAR V. MENONMEERA V.MENON
RESPONDENTS:
1THE ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME TAX OFFICEROF INCOME TAX/INCOME TAX OFFICER
NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI-110 001
2NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, DELHI-110 001, DELHI-110 001,
REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)(APPEALS)
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSIONON 17.05.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THEFOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Aggrieved by Exts.P1 and P2 orders of assessment relating toassessment year 2013-2014 and 2015-2016, petitioner haspreferred appeals before the 2[nd] respondent, copy of which areproduced as Exts.P3 and P4. Petitions for stay of proceedingspursuant to the assessment orders have also been filed as Exts.P5and P6. Petitioner apprehends coercive proceedings to be effectedeven before the petition for stay is considered. Hence this writpetition.
2. Having considered the submissions of the counsel for thepetitioner as well as the respondents, I am of the opinion that thiswrit petition itself can be disposed of with a direction.
3. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 2[nd]respondent to consider and pass orders on Exts.P5 and P6 staypetitions, within a period of two months from the date of receipt ofa copy of this judgment. Till such a decision is taken, all coerciveproceedings against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.
JUDGE
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16024/2022
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2013-14 DATED29.03.2022
Exhibit P2COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2015-16 DATED27.03.2022
Exhibit P3COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT 2013-14 DATED 29.04.2022
Exhibit P4COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT 2015-16 DATED 29.04.2022
Exhibit P5COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT 2013-14 DATED 27.04.2022
Exhibit P6COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT 2015-16 DATED 27.04.2022
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.