Case LawHigh Court › M/S.stark Communications (Bangalore) Pvt...

M/S.stark Communications (Bangalore) Pvt.ltdno v. Mathew

High Court 29 Jul 2013 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
M/S.stark Communications (Bangalore) Pvt.ltdno v. Mathew
Date of order
29 Jul 2013
Assessment year(s)
2010-11
Outcome
Other

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In M/S.stark Communications (Bangalore) Pvt.ltdno v. Mathew, the High Court (2013) decided the matter.

Decision: The Writ Petition is disposed of. ncd V.

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 V.CHITAMBARESH MONDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF JULY 2013/7TH SRAVANA, 1935 WP(C).No. 18836 of 2013 (D) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- M/S.STARK COMMUNICATIONS (BANGALORE) PVT.LTDNO. 1142, 1ST CROSS, 12TH MAINHAL 2ND STAGE, INDIRANAGARBANGALORE 560 008 REPRESENTED BYITS MANAGING DIRECTOR SHRI. ROY V. MATHEW BY ADVS.SRI.T.M.SREEDHARAN (SR.) SRI.V.P.NARAYANAN SMT.BOBY M.SEKHAR SMT.DIVYA RAVINDRAN RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1.THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXCIRCLE 4(1), RANGE - 4, C.R. BUILDINGSI.S. PRESS ROAD, KOCHI 682 018.CIRCLE 4(1), RANGE - 4, C.R. BUILDINGSI.S. PRESS ROAD, KOCHI 682 018. 2.THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) -II6TH FLOOR, KERA BHAVAN, SRVHS ROADCOCHIN 682 016. BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON29-07-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1:TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 28.03.2013FOR THE AY-2010-11 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT ALONGWITH THE DEMAND NOTICE.FOR THE AY-2010-11 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT ALONGWITH THE DEMAND NOTICE. EXHIBIT P2:TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED20.04.2013 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2NDRESPONDENT FOR AY - 2010-11.20.04.2013 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2NDRESPONDENT FOR AY - 2010-11. EXHIBIT P2(a):TRUE COPY OF STAY PETITION DATED 22.04.2013 FILED BY THEPETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR AY - 2010 -11.PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR AY - 2010 -11. EXHIBIT P3:TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO. AAHCS 9738H DATED 11.07.2013ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT ALONG WITH THERECTIFICATION ORDER 26.06.2013.ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT ALONG WITH THERECTIFICATION ORDER 26.06.2013. EXHIBIT P4:TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 20.07.2013 GIVEN BY THEPETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P5:TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 25.07.2013 GIVEN BYTHE PETITIONER U/S 220(6) TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.THE PETITIONER U/S 220(6) TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT(S) EXHIBITS : NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. V. CHITAMBARESH, J-------------------------------- WP(C) NO. 18836 OF 2013------------------------------------ Dated this the 29[th] day of July, 2013 JUDGMENT The petitioner has filed Ext.P2 appeal accompanied byExt.P2(a) petition for stay against Ext.P1 order of assessment.The petitioner has aggrieved by Ext.P3 notice issued in themeanwhile pending appeal and the petition for stay. 2.I direct the second respondent to consider Ext.P2(a)petition with notice to the petitioner within a period of onemonth. The coercive steps pursuant to Ext.P3 notice shall be puton hold till orders are passed on Ext.P2(a) petition as directedabove. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the Writ Petitionwith the judgment before the second respondent for compliance. The Writ Petition is disposed of. ncd V. CHITAMBARESH 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