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

By Advs.harisankar v. Menonmeera V.menonr.sreejithk.krishna

High Court 17 May 2022 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
By Advs.harisankar v. Menonmeera V.menonr.sreejithk.krishna
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.menonr.sreejithk.krishna, 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 ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. TUESDAY, THE 17 DAY OF MAY 2022 / 27TH VAISAKHA, 1944WP(C) NO. 16044 OF 2022 PETITIONER: THE ARIYUR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO. F1566, 7/505, KOTTOPADAM, MANNARKKAD, PALAKKAD, 678 583, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, N.P. KARTHIAYANI. NO. F1566, 7/505, KOTTOPADAM, MANNARKKAD, PALAKKAD, BY ADVS.HARISANKAR V. MENONMEERA V.MENONR.SREEJITHK.KRISHNA RESPONDENT/S: 1THE ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME TAX OFFICER,NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI 110 001. 2NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, DELHI 110 001. REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON17.05.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT Aggrieved by Ext.P1 order of assessment relating toassessment year 2015-2016, petitioner has preferred appeal beforethe 2[nd] respondent, copy of which is produced as Ext.P2. Petition forstay of proceedings pursuant to the assessment order has also beenfiled as Ext.P3. Petitioner apprehends coercive proceedings to beeffected even before the petition for stay is considered. Hence thiswrit petition. 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] respondentto consider and pass orders on Ext.P3 stay petition, within a periodof two 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/- ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. JUDGE APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16044/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2015-16. Exhibit P2 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. Exhibit P3 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER 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