Case LawHigh Court › Wp(C)/10568/2010 Of Amina Abdul Sameed,...

Wp(C)/10568/2010 Of Amina Abdul Sameed, Tholpetty v. Agricultural Income Tax

High Court 29 Mar 2010 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Wp(C)/10568/2010 Of Amina Abdul Sameed, Tholpetty v. Agricultural Income Tax
Date of order
29 Mar 2010
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

Case summary

In Wp(C)/10568/2010 Of Amina Abdul Sameed, Tholpetty v. Agricultural Income Tax, the High Court (2010) 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.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 29TH MARCH 2010 / 8TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 10568 of 2010(U) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- AMINA ABDUL SAMAD, BARGIRI "B" ESTATE: THOLPETTY BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER S.V. IMBICHAMMED, S/O.A.V.KOYAMOIDEEN, BAITHUL MARIYAM, 19/578,CHALAPURAM PO, CALICUT-2. BY ADV. MR.P.RAGHUNATH, MR.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN. RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. AGRL. INCOME TAX AND CT OFFICER, VYTHIRI AT KALPETTA. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), KOZHIKODE. 3. INSPECTING ASST.COMMISSIONER, KALPETTA. R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.C.K. GOVINDAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/03/2010, ALONG WITH WP(C) NO. 10565 OF 2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~W.P.(C).Nos.10565 & 10568 of 2010~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Dated this the 29[th] day of March, 2010 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ J U D G M E N T The very same petitioner has filed the above two writ petitions, challenging the similar cause of actions. Ext.P1assessment orders have been subjected to challenge, byfiling Ext.P2 appeals, along with Ext.P3 petitions for stay,which are pending consideration before the 2[nd] respondent.The petitioner has approached this Court because of thecoercive steps stated as being pursued, without any regardto the pendency of the said proceedings. 2. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 3. Considering the facts and circumstances, the 2[nd] respondent is directed to consider and pass appropriateorders on Ext.P2 petitions for stay, in accordance with law asexpeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. All recoveryproceedings stated as being pursued against the petitioner,shall be kept in abeyance till such time. Both the Writ Petitions are disposed of as above. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENONJUDGE nl
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