By Advs.sri.harisankar v. Menonsmt.meera V.menon
High Court
02 Apr 2019 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
By Advs.sri.harisankar v. Menonsmt.meera V.menon
Date of order
02 Apr 2019
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In By Advs.sri.harisankar v. Menonsmt.meera V.menon, the High Court (2019) 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 S.V.BHATTI
TUESDAY ,THE 02ND DAY OF APRIL 2019 / 12TH CHAITHRA, 1941
WP(C).No. 10147 of 2019
PETITIONER/S:
M.BRIJESHAGED 44 YEARSS/O. RAMANKUTTY GUPTHAN, PROPRIETOR, M/S. GEETHAM SWEETS, 30/167, BIG BAZAR, PALAKKAD.
BY ADVS.SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENONSMT.MEERA V.MENON
RESPONDENT/S:
1THE INCOME TAX OFFICERWARD-1, PALAKKAD-678 014.WARD-1, PALAKKAD-678 014.
2THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)3RD FLOOR, AAYKAR BHAVAN, THRISSUR-680 001.3RD FLOOR, AAYKAR BHAVAN, THRISSUR-680 001.
3UCO BANKMARKET ROAD, PALAKKAD-678 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER.MARKET ROAD, PALAKKAD-678 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER.
4STATE BANK OF INDIAMARKET ROAD, PALAKKAD-678 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER.MARKET ROAD, PALAKKAD-678 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER.
5INDIAN BANKKANDATH COMPLEX, PALAKKAD-678 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER.KANDATH COMPLEX, PALAKKAD-678 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER.
6PALAKKAD DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.SREEKRISHNAPURAM BRANCH, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN-679 513, REPRESENTED BY ITS MAANGER.SREEKRISHNAPURAM BRANCH, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN-679 513, REPRESENTED BY ITS MAANGER.
W.P.(C) Nos. 10147 & 10207/2019
BY ADV. SRI.AMAL GEORGE, SC, SBI
OTHER PRESENT:
SC SRI. DEEPAK JOY., JOSE JOSEPH.,M. SASINDRAN., S. EASWARAN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.04.2019, ALONG WITH WP(C).10207/2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) Nos. 10147 & 10207/2019
-3-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI
TUESDAY ,THE 02ND DAY OF APRIL 2019 / 12TH CHAITHRA, 1941
WP(C).No. 10207 of 2019
PETITIONER/S:
M.BRIJESHAGED 44 YEARSRAMANKUTTY GUPTHAN, PROPRIETOR, M/S. GEETHAM SWEETS, 30/167, BIG BAZAR, PALAKKAD.
BY ADVS.SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENONSMT.MEERA V.MENON
RESPONDENT/S:
1THE INCOME TAX OFFICERWARD - 1, PALAKKAD - 678 014.
2THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)3RD FLOOR, AAYKAR BHAVAN, THRISSUR - 680 001
3UCO BANKMARKET ROAD, PALAKKAD - 678 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCHMANAGER.MARKET ROAD, PALAKKAD - 678 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCHMANAGER.
4STATE BANK OF INDIAMARKET ROAD, PALAKKAD - 678 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCHMANAGER.MARKET ROAD, PALAKKAD - 678 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCHMANAGER.
5INDIAN BANKKANDATH COMPLEX, PALAKKAD M - 678 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER.KANDATH COMPLEX, PALAKKAD M - 678 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER.
6PALAKKAD DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,SREEKRISHNAPURAM BRANCH, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 679 513, REPRESENTED BY ITSSREEKRISHNAPURAM BRANCH, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 679 513, REPRESENTED BY ITS
BY ADV. SRI.AMAL GEORGE, SC, SBI
OTHER PRESENT:
SC SRI. JOSE JOSEPH., SRI. S EASWARAN., M. SASINDRAN., SRI. DEEPAK JOY.DEEPAK JOY.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.04.2019, ALONG WITH WP(C).10147/2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
J U D G M E N T
[ WP(C) 10147/2019 ,WP(C).10207/2019 ]
Heard Sri Harisankar V. Menon, the learned counsel for thepetitioner, Sri Jose Joseph, the learned counsel for the first and secondrespondents, Sri Deepak Joy, the learned counsel for the thirdrespondent, Sri Amal George, the learned counsel for the fourthrespondent, Sri S Easwaran, the learned counsel for the fifth respondentand Sri M. Sasindran, the learned counsel for the sixth respondent.
2.The petitioner prays for the following reliefs in both the writ
petitions:
“(i)To direct the respondents to grant 2 months time to makepayment of the dues towards the amount ordered at Ext.P2 by the issueof a writ of mandamus or such other writ or order or direction.payment of the dues towards the amount ordered at Ext.P2 by the issueof a writ of mandamus or such other writ or order or direction.
2.The petitioner prays for the following reliefs in both the writ
petitions:
“(i)To direct the respondents to grant 2 months time to makepayment of the dues towards the amount ordered at Ext.P2 by the issueof a writ of mandamus or such other writ or order or direction.payment of the dues towards the amount ordered at Ext.P2 by the issueof a writ of mandamus or such other writ or order or direction.
(ii)To direct the respondents to permit the petitioner to operatehis accounts with the respondents 3 to 6 Banks by the issue of writ ofmandamus or such other writ or order or direction.his accounts with the respondents 3 to 6 Banks by the issue of writ ofmandamus or such other writ or order or direction.
(iii)To grant the petitioner such other incidental reliefs includingthe costs of these proceedings.”the costs of these proceedings.”
3.Sri Harisankar V. Menon, the learned counsel, restricts his
prayer to direct the respondents to dispose of Ext.P3 in both the writ
petitions and further submits that the petitioner would co-operate withthe Department either in disposing of the representation or adhering tothe time that may be granted in this behalf for paying the lastinstalment.
4.The learned Standing Counsel for revenue contends that innormal circumstances, he would not have opposed the writ prayer butthe facts of the case on hand do not encourage the Court to showindulgence of any kind. According to the counsel, the petitioner is nottreating the instalments stipulated by the Department with the requiredseriousness but with complete complacency and at the first instanceprays for dismissing the writ petition.
5.He alternatively submits that it is for the petitioner to co-operate with the Department and if proper co-operation is extended,Ext.P3 representation to the extent of extension of time for paying thelast instalment could be considered. The statement is placed on record.
6.The circumstances though are not encouraging straight awayin exercising discretion in favour of the petitioner, but appreciating thebona fides to clear the last instalment without further recourse to law by
the Department, this Court is satisfied that the first respondent considers
and disposes of Ext.P3 request in both the writ petitions to the limitedextent of considering the time prayed by the petitioner for dischargingthe last instalment as expeditiously as possible, preferably within twoweeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment.
Communicate the judgment forthwith.
Sd/-
S.V.BHATTIJUDGE
jjj
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 10147/2019
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1
COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2012-13 DATED 29.12.2016.
EXHIBIT P2COPY OF ORDER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 13.12.2017.
EXHIBIT P3
COPY OF LETTER SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT DATED 6.2.2019.
EXHIBIT P4
COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT BANK DATED 30.3.2019.
-9-
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 10207/2019
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:EXHIBIT P1
COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2012-13
EXHIBIT P2EXHIBIT P3
COPY OF ORDER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
COPY OF LETTER SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P4
COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED BY THE ST RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT BANK
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.