By Advs.sri.harisankar v. Menonsmt.meera V.menon
High Court
17 Feb 2020 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
By Advs.sri.harisankar v. Menonsmt.meera V.menon
Date of order
17 Feb 2020
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 (2020) decided the matter.
Decision: 2.Having heard the learned counsel on both sides, thewrit petition is disposed of with a direction to the secondrespondent to take a decision on Ext.P2 appeal in accordancewith law, after affording an opportunity of hearing to thepetitioner, within a period of three months from the date ofreceipt of...
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 AMIT RAWAL
MONDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 28TH MAGHA, 1941
WP(C).No.4362 OF 2020(U)
PETITIONER/S:
THE THADUKKASSERY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. F
534KERALASSERY.P.O,KONGAD,PALAKKAD-678641, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,VIJAYAKUMARI.M.P,AGED 51, D/O.NARAYANAN NAIR.
BY ADVS.SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENONSMT.MEERA V.MENON
RESPONDENT/S:
1THE INCOME TAX OFFICERWARD 2,AYAKAR BHAVAN,PALAKKAD-678014.
2THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS),SAKTHAN NAGAR,THRISSUR-680021.
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON17.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Petitioner has approached this Court seeking a directionto dispose of Ext.P2 appeal preferred before the secondrespondent/Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) against theassessment order Ext.P1.
2.Having heard the learned counsel on both sides, thewrit petition is disposed of with a direction to the secondrespondent to take a decision on Ext.P2 appeal in accordancewith law, after affording an opportunity of hearing to thepetitioner, within a period of three months from the date ofreceipt of a copy of this judgment without insisting on paymentof 20% of the tax demanded, as per circular of 2017. Till suchtime a decision is taken on the appeal, recovery proceedingspursuant to the assessment order shall be kept in abeyance.
sab
Sd/-
AMIT RAWAL
JUDGE
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1
COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1STRESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2017-18
EXHIBIT P2
COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT -2017-18
EXHIBIT P3
COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P4
COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
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.