By Advs.sri.harisankar v. Menonsmt.meera V.menon
High Court
26 Jun 2020 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
By Advs.sri.harisankar v. Menonsmt.meera V.menon
Date of order
26 Jun 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 thirdrespondent to take a decision on Ext.P3 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
FRIDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF JUNE 2020 / 5TH ASHADHA, 1942
WP(C).No.8805 OF 2020(A)
PETITIONER/S:
THE SHOLAYUR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED NO.P 1169
KOTTATHARA P.O., ATTAPPADI, MANNARKKAD, PALAKKAD-678 581, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, SANAL PAUL, AGED 38,S/O. N.V. PAUL
BY ADVS.SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENONSMT.MEERA V.MENON
RESPONDENT/S:
1THE INCOME TAX OFFICERWARD 4, AYAKAR BHAVAN, PALAKKAD-678 014WARD 4, AYAKAR BHAVAN, PALAKKAD-678 014
2THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)THRISSUR-680 021THRISSUR-680 021
3THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,AYAKAR BHAVAN, KAKKANADU,KOCHI-682 030, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI JOSE JOSEPH SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON26.06.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 26th day of June 2020
Petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction todispose of Ext.P3 appeal preferred before the third respondentagainst the appellate order Ext.P2.
2.Having heard the learned counsel on both sides, thewrit petition is disposed of with a direction to the thirdrespondent to take a decision on Ext.P3 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 appellate order shall be kept in abeyance.
Sd/-
AMIT RAWAL
JUDGE
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1
COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2014-15
EXHIBIT P2
COPY OF APPELLATE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2014-15
EXHIBIT P3
COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT 2014-15
EXHIBIT P4
COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD 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.