Case LawHigh Court › J U D G M E N T v. Heard The Learned Sta...

J U D G M E N T v. Heard The Learned Standing Counsel Appearing For Therespondents As Well

High Court 20 May 2016 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
J U D G M E N T v. Heard The Learned Standing Counsel Appearing For Therespondents As Well
Date of order
20 May 2016
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In J U D G M E N T v. Heard The Learned Standing Counsel Appearing For Therespondents As Well, the High Court (2016) decided the matter.

Decision: 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.M.SHAFFIQUE FRIDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF MAY 2016/20TH VAISAKHA 1938 WP(C).No. 17750 of 2016 (P) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- M/S. ST.ALPHONSA TIMBER & TRADERS PRIVATE LIMITED,KUNDANOOR, MARADU POST-682 304, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITSMANAGING DIRECTOR JESSY THOMAS. BY ADVS.SRI.O.RAMACHANDRAN NAMBIAR, SRI.GEEN T.MATHEW. RESPONDENT(S):-------------------------- 1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), OFFICE OF THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), KOCHI, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, C.R. BUILDINGS, I.S. PRESS ROAD, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-682 018. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) III, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (APPEALS) III, 1ST FLOOR, POORNIMA, 28/243, NEAR MANORAMA JUNCTION, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-682 036. BY ADV. SRI.K.M.V.PANDALAI, SC. rs. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20-05-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 17750 of 2016 (P) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENTDATED 25-11-2014.DATED 25-11-2014. P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENTDATED 25-11-2014.DATED 25-11-2014. P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENTDATED 25-11-2014.DATED 25-11-2014. P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENTDATED 25-11-2014.DATED 25-11-2014. P5 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENTDATED 25-11-2014.DATED 25-11-2014. P6 : TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL IN EXT P1. P6(A) : TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL IN EXT P2. P6(B) : TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL IN EXT P3. P6(C) : TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL IN EXT P4. P6(D) : TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL IN EXT P5. P7 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENTDATED 21-04-2015.DATED 21-04-2015. P8 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENTDATED 21-04-2015.DATED 21-04-2015. P9 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENTDATED 21-04-2015.DATED 21-04-2015. P10 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENTDATED 21-04-2015.DATED 21-04-2015. P11 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENTDATED 21-04-2015.DATED 21-04-2015. P12 : TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONERBEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN EXTS P6(A) APPEAL.BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN EXTS P6(A) APPEAL. WP(C).No. 17750 of 2016 (P) P12(A) : TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONERBEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN EXTS P6(B) APPEAL.BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN EXTS P6(B) APPEAL. P12(B) : TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONERBEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN EXTS P6(C) APPEAL.BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN EXTS P6(C) APPEAL. P12(C) : TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONERBEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN EXTS P6(D) APPEAL.BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN EXTS P6(D) APPEAL. P12(D) : TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN EXTS P6(E) APPEAL. BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN EXTS P6(E) APPEAL. P13 : TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 24-02-2016 IN WP(C).NO. 7803 OF 2016-I BEFORE THIS HONOURABLE COURT.WP(C).NO. 7803 OF 2016-I BEFORE THIS HONOURABLE COURT. P14 : TRUE COPY OF THE STAY ORDER DATED 09-04-2016 ISSUED BYTHE 2ND RESPONDENT.THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE rs. A.M. SHAFFIQUE, J.=============W.P. (C) No.17750 of 2016=================== Dated this, the 20[th] day of May, 2016 J U D G M E N T P12(D) : TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN EXTS P6(E) APPEAL. BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN EXTS P6(E) APPEAL. P13 : TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 24-02-2016 IN WP(C).NO. 7803 OF 2016-I BEFORE THIS HONOURABLE COURT.WP(C).NO. 7803 OF 2016-I BEFORE THIS HONOURABLE COURT. P14 : TRUE COPY OF THE STAY ORDER DATED 09-04-2016 ISSUED BYTHE 2ND RESPONDENT.THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE rs. A.M. SHAFFIQUE, J.=============W.P. (C) No.17750 of 2016=================== Dated this, the 20[th] day of May, 2016 J U D G M E N T Petitioner challenges Ext.P14, an order passed by theCommissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in a stay petition withreference to an appeal filed against orders passed for assessmentyears 2010-11 to 2014-2015. Petitioner submits that as againstthe judgment of this Court in WP(C) No. 14431/2014 (ExcelTimbers Private Limited v. Deputy Commissioner ofIncome Tax), appeals are heard by a Division Bench of this Courtand are reserved for orders. In the meantime, when the petitionerhas substantial contentions to be urged in the appeal, theauthority had called upon the petitioner to remit the entireamount demanded. It is contended that when substantialcontentions are urged in the appeal, the direction to pay entireamount is too harsh. 2.Heard the learned standing counsel appearing for therespondents as well. 3.A perusal of Ext.P14 would clearly indicate that the -:2:- appellate authority had considered the stay petition on merits. Aslaw stands today, the judgment in Excel Timbers PrivateLimited (supra) holds the field. Under such circumstances, I donot find any error in the order passed by the appellate authoritydirecting the petitioner to remit the amount demanded. Theauthority had further granted time to pay the amount in fourequal monthly instalments of `7,96,127/- each month, startingfrom May 2016. 4.Taking into consideration the fact that the appealagainst Excel Timbers Private Limited (supra) is reserved forjudgment by the Division Bench, I am of the view that someindulgence can be shown to the petitioner to remit the amountand accordingly, Ext.P14 is modified as under. 5.That the payment of `31,84,508/- shall be made in fourequal monthly instalments of `7,96,127/- each month, startingfrom 20/6/2016. Writ petition is disposed of as above. Rp20/05/2016 //True Copy// Sd/- A.M. SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE 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