By Advs.sri.harisankar v. Menonsmt.meera V.menonsmt.k.krishna
High Court
03 Mar 2020 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
By Advs.sri.harisankar v. Menonsmt.meera V.menonsmt.k.krishna
Date of order
03 Mar 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.menonsmt.k.krishna, the High Court (2020) decided the matter.
Decision: The writ petition is disposed of.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
TUESDAY, THE 03RD DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 13TH PHALGUNA, 1941
WP(C).No.6273 OF 2020(H)
PETITIONER/S:
PHILO RAJANAGED 63 YEARSTHEKKEKKARA HOUSE, GURU SREE LANE, KOORKKANCHERRY, THRISSUR-680 007.
BY ADVS.SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENONSMT.MEERA V.MENONSMT.K.KRISHNA
RESPONDENT/S:
1THE INCOME TAX OFFICERWARD 2(4), AAYAKARA BHAVAN, SAKTHANM THAMPURAM NAGAR,THRISSUR-680 001.
2THE TAHSILDAR,TALUK OFFICE, KOTHAMANGALAM-686 691.
3THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KOTTAPPADY VILLAGE,KOTTAPPADY-680 505, THRISSUR DISTRICT.
SRI JOSE JOSEPH SC GP DR THUSHARA JAMES
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON03.03.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
The challenge in the present writ petition is Ext.P5communication dated 20.1.2020 in response to Ext.P2application submitted by the petitioner intimating the income taxauthorities for closing the account kept in the SBI on thepremise that the land was sold in February 2017 and she had notbeen able to buy a home within a reasonable period. LearnedCounsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted thatthough such an application ought not to have been filedpetitioner was not properly advised at the best could haveclaimed the exemption qua the applicablity or non applicabilityof the capital gain, but her rights are prejudiced on account ofthe impugned communication Ext.P5, whereby the request madein Ext.P2 has been rejected on the basis of the report of theVillage Officer as the nature and character of the property hasnot been found to be agricultural land. The aforementionedorder would be an impediment to the petitioner to claimexemption while filing return for the relevant assessment year.
authorities would submit that Ext.P2 application was notmaintainable. It is also submitted that the impugned decisioncannot be said to be erroneous or illegal as it is based on thereport of the village officer, and no documents countering thereport of the village officer has been placed on record, and urgesthis Court for the dismissal of the writ petition.
3.Having heard learned Counsel for the parties I am ofthe view that Ext.P2 application ought not to have been filed inthe manner and mode as indicated above. Petitioner at the bestcould have claim exemption of non-applicablity of capital gain bygiving detailed reason for computation of income and seeksassessment in accordanc with law. The apprehension of thepetitioner as expressed in the present writ petition cannot beignored for the reason that petitioner is prevented from claimingsuch exemption in case he choses to file return. In order to haveequuitious and interest of justice, I dispose of this writ petitionwith libety to the petitioner to claim the benefit as sought inExt.P2 by filing return and in case any such benefit is claimedthe income tax authorities will decide the matter withoutprejudice to Ext.P5, in other wards, the same shall not stand in
the way of the assessing authority in considering the matterafresh. The writ petition is disposed of.
Jm/
Sd/
AMIT RAWALJUDGE
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1A TRUE COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARD OF THE PETITIONER ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.PETITIONER ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P2A TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION DATED 13/01/2020 BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT ALONG WITHENGLISH TRANSLATION.13/01/2020 BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT ALONG WITHENGLISH TRANSLATION.
EXHIBIT P3A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION UNDER RIGHT INFORMATION DATED 30/01/2020.INFORMATION DATED 30/01/2020.
EXHIBIT P4A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 31/01/2020 BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P4 ACOPY OF ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT.P4 REPORT ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.REPORT ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
Jm/
Sd/
AMIT RAWALJUDGE
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1A TRUE COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARD OF THE PETITIONER ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.PETITIONER ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P2A TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION DATED 13/01/2020 BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT ALONG WITHENGLISH TRANSLATION.13/01/2020 BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT ALONG WITHENGLISH TRANSLATION.
EXHIBIT P3A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION UNDER RIGHT INFORMATION DATED 30/01/2020.INFORMATION DATED 30/01/2020.
EXHIBIT P4A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 31/01/2020 BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P4 ACOPY OF ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT.P4 REPORT ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.REPORT ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P5TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 16/01/2020 TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT.RESPONDENT DATED 16/01/2020 TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P6TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF EXPRESSION OF INTEREST FORWARDED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 16/01/2020.INTEREST FORWARDED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 16/01/2020.
EXHIBIT P1COPY OF DEPOSIT RECEIPT OF THE PETITIONER (PASS BOOK) FROM STATE BANK OF INDIA.(PASS BOOK) FROM STATE BANK OF INDIA.
EXHIBIT P2COPY OF APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONERBEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P3COPY OF APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONERBEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P4COPY OF REPORT ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P4 ACOPY OF ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT.P4 REPORT ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.REPORT ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P5COPY OF ORDER 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.