K. Akbar Ali. Aged 59 Yearszaina Manzilveekshanam Road.kochi, Pin v. Menonmeera V.menonr.sreejithk.krishna
High Court
16 Dec 2022 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
K. Akbar Ali. Aged 59 Yearszaina Manzilveekshanam Road.kochi, Pin v. Menonmeera V.menonr.sreejithk.krishna
Date of order
16 Dec 2022
Assessment year(s)
2014-15
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In K. Akbar Ali. Aged 59 Yearszaina Manzilveekshanam Road.kochi, Pin v. Menonmeera V.menonr.sreejithk.krishna, the High Court (2022) 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 GOPINATH P.
FRIDAY, THE 16 DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 25TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 40891 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
1K. AKBAR ALI. AGED 59 YEARSZAINA MANZILVEEKSHANAM ROAD.KOCHI, PIN - 682018BY ADVS.HARISANKAR V. MENONMEERA V.MENONR.SREEJITHK.KRISHNA
RESPONDENTS:
1THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXCENTRAL CIRCLE,-1ERNAKULAM, PIN - 6820182NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTREDELHI, PIN – 110001REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS).ADV. CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, STANDING COUNSEL
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON16.12.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 16[th] day of December, 2022
The petitioner has suffered Ext.P1 order ofassessment for the assessment year 2014-15 underthe provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Thepetitioner has preferred Ext.P2 appeal along withExt.P3 stay petition before the 2[nd] respondent. In themeanwhile, the petitioner has been issued with Ext.P4notice demanding the payment of amounts due underExt.P1 order of assessment. The petitioner prays thatpending consideration of Ext.P3 stay petition by the2[nd] respondent, demands under Ext.P1 order ofassessment maybe stayed.
2. Heard the learned Standing Counsel also.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances ofthe case and considering the limited nature of reliefsought for by the petitioner, the writ petition willstand disposed of directing that any steps to recover
amounts due under Ext.P1 order of assessment shallbe kept in abeyance till orders are passed on Ext.P3stay petition by the 2[nd]respondent. The 2[nd]respondent shall endeavour to pass orders on Ext.P3within a period of two months from the date of receiptof a certified copy of this judgment.
SKP/16-12
Sd/-
GOPINATH P.JUDGE
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 40891/2022
PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1
COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2014-15 DTD. 27-09-2021
EXHIBIT P2COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2014-15 DTD. 27-10-2021EXHIBIT P3COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2014-15 DTD. 12-12-2022
EXHIBIT P4
COPY OF ARREAR NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DTD. 05-12-2022
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:NIL
TRUE COPY
P.A.TO JUDGE
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.