Case LawHigh Court › Wp(C)/10349/2018 Of Shri. M.a Jaleel v....

Wp(C)/10349/2018 Of Shri. M.a Jaleel v. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax

High Court 26 Mar 2018 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Wp(C)/10349/2018 Of Shri. M.a Jaleel v. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax
Date of order
26 Mar 2018
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

Case summary

In Wp(C)/10349/2018 Of Shri. M.a Jaleel v. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, the High Court (2018) decided the matter.

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 HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR MONDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF MARCH 2018 / 5TH CHAITHRA, 1940 WP(C).No. 10349 of 2018 PETITIONER(S) SHRI. M.A JALEEL S/O. ABDUL RAHIMAN, AGED 39 YEARS, 104/6, MANAKKAL PADATH PADINJARETHIL HOUSE, VETTIKKATTIRI, CHERUTHURUTY P.O., THRISSUR - 679 531. BY ADVS.SRI.T.M.SREEDHARAN (SR.) SRI.V.P.NARAYANAN SMT.DIVYA RAVINDRAN RESPONDENT(S) 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, THRISSUR - 680 001. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) -III 28/243, 'POORNIMA', NEAR MANORAMA JUNCTION, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, KOCHI - 682 036. R BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26-03-2018,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1. TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 28.12.2017 ALONG WITH COMPUTATION OF INCOME AND DEMAND NOTICE PASSED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2013-14EXHIBIT P2. TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 28.12.2017 ALONG WITH COMPUTATION OF INCOME AND DEMAND NOTICE PASSED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2014-15EXHIBIT P3. TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 28.12.2017 ALONG WITH COMPUTATION OF INCOME AND DEMAND NOTICE PASSED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2015-16EXHIBIT P4. TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 31.1.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2013-14EXHIBIT P4 (a). TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 12.3.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2013-14EXHIBIT P5. TRUE COPY OF MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 31.1.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2014-15EXHIBIT P5 (a). TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 12.3.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2014-15EXHIBIT P6. TRUE COPY MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 31.1.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2015-16EXHIBIT P6 (a). TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 12.3.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2015-16 RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS NIL /TRUE COPY/ VPS PS TO JUDGE P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J. --------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 10349 of 2018 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 26[th] day of March, 2018 JUDGMENT Petitioner is an assessee under the Income Tax Act(the Act) on the rolls of the first respondent. Aggrieved byExts.P1, P2 & P3 assessment orders, the petitioner preferredExts.P4, P5 & P6 appeals before the second respondent.Exts.P4(a), P5(a) & P6(a) are applications for stay preferred bythe petitioner in Exts.P4, P5 & P6 appeals. The grievance of thepetitioner in the writ petition concerns the delay on the part ofthe second respondent in passing orders on Exts.P4(a), P5(a) &P6(a) applications for stay. It is alleged by the petitioner in thewrit petition that proceedings have already been initiated forrealisation of the amounts covered by Exts.P1, P2 & P3 orders.The petitioner, therefore, seeks appropriate directions in this regard, in this writ petition. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. regard, in this writ petition. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of thecase, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petitiondirecting the second respondent to take a decision on Exts.P4(a),P5(a) & P6(a) applications for stay, within two months from thedate of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Ordered accordingly.Needless to say that until orders are passed on Exts.P4(a), P5(a)& P6(a) applications for stay, further proceedings for realisationof the amounts covered by Exts.P1, P2 & P3 assessment ordersshall be deferred. Sd/- vps 26/3 P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE /True Copy/ PS 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