Sri.harisankar v. Menon

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 1ST SEPTEMBER 2008 / 10TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 26266 of 2008(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ USHA SCHOOL OF ATHLETICSKOYILANDYKOZHIKODE DISTRICTREP.BY P.A.AJANACHANDRANSECRETARY BY ADV. SRI.ARIKKAT VIJAYAN MENON SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON SMT.MEERA V.MENON SRI.MAHESH V.MENON RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. INCOME TAX OFFICERWARD NO.2(1)`KOZHIKODE 2. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXKOZHIKODE 3. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS-I)KOZHIKODE BY SRI.GEORGE K.GEORGE, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M. JOSEPH, J. ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 26266 OF 2008 B ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 1[st] day of September, 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is a charitable trust engaged in the promotion of sports. Petitioner is assessed to tax by Ext.P2.Admittedly, this is done on the basis of the amount whichreceived by the petitioner in a total sum of Rs.11 lakhsremained unutilized. According to the petitioner,on account ofcertain circumstances it could not be utilized during the yearin question. The petitioner had already moved Ext.P3application before the assessing authority and also filedExt.P4 petition for condonation of delay. Petitioner seeks toquash Ext.P6 order. By Ext.P6 order, the assessing authorityrefused to stay of recovery but permitted payment of theamount due in instalments. Recovery steps are directed to betaken on default in payment. 2.I heard learned counsel for the petitioner andlearned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents. WPC.26266/08 Having regard to the facts of this case, writ petition isdisposed of as follows. There will be a direction to the 2[nd] respondent to passorders on Ext.P4 application in accordance with law withinone month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.It is further ordered that if the delay is condoned and if thepetitioner files a stay petition in Ext.P3 appeal before the 3[rd]respondent, the 3[rd] respondent will take a decision thereon inaccordance with law, within three weeks from the date ofpassing of the order in Ext.P4 by the 2[nd] respondent. Tillorders are passed as aforesaid, there will be no furtherproceedings against the petitioner on the basis of Ext.P1assessment order. aks Sd/- (K.M.JOSEPH, JUDGE) /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE