Wp(C)/1120/2019 Of M/S. Zain Shoes v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax
High Court
15 Jan 2019 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Wp(C)/1120/2019 Of M/S. Zain Shoes v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax
Date of order
15 Jan 2019
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Wp(C)/1120/2019 Of M/S. Zain Shoes v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, the High Court (2019) decided the matter.
Decision: This writ petition is disposed of as above.
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 ERNAKULAMPRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
TUESDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF JANUARY 2019 / 25TH POUSHA, 1940WP(C).No.1120 of 2019
PETITIONER:
M/S. ZAIN SHOES40/1850, QUEEN TOWER, NARAKKATHARA ROAD, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682 035, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER MR.SHIRAZ K.V.
BY ADVS.SMT.S.K.DEVISMT.P.K.MAYA DEVI
RESPONDENTS:
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, SC, INCOME TAX.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15.01.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.1120/2019
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner approached the 2[nd] respondent in appeals as against
certain orders passed under the Income Tax Act, 1961.
2. The petitioner would submit that they had already deposited 20%
of the demand. In the meanwhile, steps have been taken to recover theamount pursuant to the impugned orders in appeals. Ext.P7 is the notice.It is submitted that the petitioner's Bank Account has been freezed.
In the light of the fact that the petitioner had already deposited 20%, itis appropriate that no coercive steps shall be taken again the petitioner tillthe appeals are disposed of. If the Bank Account has already beenfreezed, it is ordered to be defreezed forthwith.
This writ petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
JUDGE
smp
W.P.(C) No.1120/2019
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2014-15 DATED 20/07/2018YEAR 2014-15 DATED 20/07/2018
EXHIBIT P2TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2015-16 DATED 20/07/2018YEAR 2015-16 DATED 20/07/2018
EXHIBIT P3TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2016-17 DATED 20/07/2018YEAR 2016-17 DATED 20/07/2018
EXHIBIT P4TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 21/8/2018 FORTHE YEAR 2014-15THE YEAR 2014-15
EXHIBIT P5TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 21/8/2018 FORTHE YEAR 2015-16THE YEAR 2015-16
EXHIBIT P6TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 21/8/2018 FORTHE YEAR 2016-17THE YEAR 2016-17
EXHIBIT P7TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 11/1/2018 SERVED TO THE 3RD RESPONDENTSERVED TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P8TRUE COPY OF RECEIPT DATED 14/01/2019 EVIDENCING PAYMENT OF 20% OF DISPUTED TAX UNDER EXT.P1EVIDENCING PAYMENT OF 20% OF DISPUTED TAX UNDER EXT.P1
EXHIBIT P9TRUE COPY OF RECEIPT DATED 14/01/2019 EVIDENCING PAYMENT OF 20% OF DISPUTED TAX UNDER EXT P2EVIDENCING PAYMENT OF 20% OF DISPUTED TAX UNDER EXT P2
EXHIBIT P10TRUE COPY OF RECEIPT DATED 14/01/2019 EVIDENCING PAYMENT OF 20% OF DISPUTED TAX UNDER EXT.P3EVIDENCING PAYMENT OF 20% OF DISPUTED TAX UNDER EXT.P3
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL.
True Copy
P.S to Judge
smp
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.