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

By Advs.harisankar v. Menonmeera V.menon(M-206)

High Court 01 Jul 2021 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
By Advs.harisankar v. Menonmeera V.menon(M-206)
Date of order
01 Jul 2021
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In By Advs.harisankar v. Menonmeera V.menon(M-206), the High Court (2021) decided the matter.

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 A.M.BADAR THURSDAY, THE 1 DAY OF JULY 2021 / 10TH ASHADHA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 12218 OF 2021 PETITIONER: MUSLIM EDUCATIONAL ASSOCIATIONVENGOOR, PATTIKKAD, REG.NO.586/2001, PERINTHALMANNA, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY, SYED SADIK ALI SHIHAB. BY ADVS.HARISANKAR V. MENONMEERA V.MENON(M-206)-17278 RESPONDENTS: 1THE ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME-TAX OFFICERNATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI-110001.2NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTREDELHI-110001, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER. BY ADV CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.07.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT Heard both sides as the learned standing counsel appears for boththe respondents. 2. The petitioner is an assessee under the Income Tax Act. Hechallenged the assessment order for the year 2018-19 by filing appeal atExt.P2 along with the copy of stay petition. The learned counsel for thepetitioner submits that during pendency of the stay petition in thestatutory appeal challenging the assessment order at Ext.P1, theauthorities are intending to recover the amount determined by theassessment order at Ext.P1 and she therefore submits that theauthorities be restrained from recovery of the amount till disposal of theappeal. 3. The learned standing counsel for the respondents submits thaton the own averment of the petitioner, his stay application is pendingbefore the 2[nd] respondent. 4. In this view of the matter, the petition is disposed of with a direction to the 2[nd] respondent to decide the stay petition filed by thepetitioner in statutory appeal challenging the assessment order at Ext.P1within a period of three months from the date of communication of this 3 order. Needless to mention that the petitioner should co-operate with therespondents in expeditious disposal of the stay petition. Till disposal ofthe stay petition, the respondents are directed to defer the proceedingsfor recovery of the amount determined by the assessment order atExt.P1. Nsd sd/- A.M.BADAR JUDGE APPENDIX OF WP(C) 12218/2021 PETITIONER ANNEXURE Exhibit P1 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2018-19 DATED 12.03.2021. Exhibit P2 COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 09.04.2021. Exhibit P3 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONERBEFORE THE ADDITIONAL/JOINT/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, DELHI DATED 16.04.2021. //true copy//PA to Judge
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