Case LawHigh Court › By Advs.sri.harisankar v. Menonsmt.k.kri...

By Advs.sri.harisankar v. Menonsmt.k.krishnasmt.meera V.menon

High Court 28 Sep 2018 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
By Advs.sri.harisankar v. Menonsmt.k.krishnasmt.meera V.menon
Date of order
28 Sep 2018
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In By Advs.sri.harisankar v. Menonsmt.k.krishnasmt.meera V.menon, the High Court (2018) decided the matter.

Decision: This 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 A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE FRIDAY ,THE 28TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2018 / 6TH ASWINA, 1940 WP(C).No. 31693 of 2018 PETITIONER/S: SHEEJA VIJAYAPRASADTHAYYIL SREEVILAS, NANGIARKULANGARA P.O, ALAPPUZHA - 690 513 BY ADVS.SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENONSMT.K.KRISHNASMT.MEERA V.MENON RESPONDENT/S: 1THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXINTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE, AYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 003 2THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)PANAMPILLY NAGAR, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-682 036. OTHER PRESENT: SRI.JOSEPH JOSEPH, SC. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28.09.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J U D G M E N T The petitioner, challenging an order granting stay of demand by the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeal, has approached this Court. Thepetitioner's case is that the assessment was ex parte and one moreopportunity should be given. 2. Anyhow, the petitioner invoked the appellate remedy. The petitioner was only directed to pay 20% of the demand as a condition for stay. Therewas a request on the side of the petitioner to grant instalment facility to pay20%. Therefore, the petitioner shall be permitted to pay 20% of the demand inten equal monthly instalments starting from 10.10.2018 followed by everymonth. This writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE JUDGE APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2010-11 DATED 27.12.2017. True Copy P.S 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