Case LawHigh Court › Wa/275/2009 Of Antonitto v. The Chief Co...

Wa/275/2009 Of Antonitto v. The Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax

High Court 30 Mar 2009 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Wa/275/2009 Of Antonitto v. The Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax
Date of order
30 Mar 2009
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

Case summary

In Wa/275/2009 Of Antonitto v. The Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax, the High Court (2009) decided the matter.

Decision: In the above circumstances, without expressing any opinion as to the merits of the contentions taken by the appellants,this writ appeal is disposed of with a direction to the Commissioner W.A.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

The order — as passed by the High Court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.R.BANNURMATH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 30TH MARCH 2009 / 9TH CHAITHRA 1931 WA.No. 275 of 2009 --------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.3319/2009 Dated 03/02/2009 .................... APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS: ---------------------------------------- 1. ANTONITTO, S/O.LATE K.J.COLUMBUS, KALAPURACKKAL HOUSE, EDACOCHI, COCHIN 682 006. 2. ARUN COLUMBUS, S/O.ANTONITTO, KALAPURACKKAL HOUSE, EDACOCHI, COCHIN 682 006. 3. ANUPAMA JOHN, D/O.ANTONITTO, KALAPURACKKAL HOUSE, EDACOCHI, COCHIN 682 006. BY ADV. SRI.P.BALAKRISHNAN (E) SRI.MOHAN PULIKKAL SRI.K.C.KIRAN RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: ----------------------------------------------- 1. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, C.R.BUILDINGS, IS PRESS ROAD, COCHIN 682 018. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COCHIN, C.R.BUILDINGS, IS PRESS ROAD, COCHIN 682 018. 3. THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES, MINISTRY OF FINANCE (DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE) NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI. 4. THE TAX RECOVERY OFFICER, RANGE I, C.R.BUILDINGS, IS PRESS ROAD, COCHIN 682 018. BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.R.Bannurmath, C.J. & Kurian Joseph, J. ------------------------------------------ W.A.No. 275 of 2009 & I.A.No.283 of 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated, this the 30[th] day of March, 2009 JUDGMENT Kurian Joseph, J. The appellants are the writ petitioners. In the nature of the order we propose to pass in view of the interveningdevelopments, we do not think it necessary to go into the variousfactual details as referred to in the memorandum of writ appeal. Itis submitted that it will be sufficient if this Court issues a directionto the assessing authority, namely the Commissioner of IncomeTax, Cochin, to dispose of Annexure 3 petition dated 14.3.2009filed along with I.A.No.283 of 2009 expeditiously. 2. In the above circumstances, without expressing any opinion as to the merits of the contentions taken by the appellants,this writ appeal is disposed of with a direction to the Commissioner W.A. No. 275 of 2009 - 2 - of Income Tax, Cochin to dispose of Annexure 3 petition for reconciliation dated 14.3.2009 filed by the appellants within twomonths from the date of production/receipt of a copy of thisjudgment. We make it clear that we have not adverted to thevarious contentions taken by the parties. We also make it clearthat auction proceedings will be deferred till the petition isdisposed of as directed above. The appellants will produce a copy of the judgment along with a copy of the appeal memorandum and I.A.No.283 of2009 before the Commissioner of Income Tax, Cochinimmediately. S.R.Bannurmath, Chief Justice Kurian Joseph,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