Wp(C)/11910/2018 Of B Ramdas v. The Income Tax Officer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR FRIDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF APRIL 2018 / 23RD CHAITHRA, 1940 WP(C).No. 11910 of 2018 PETITIONER(S) B RAMDAS PROPRIETOR, M.R. RAMAN CHETTIAR SON, T.B. ROAD, PALAKKAD, PIN 678014 BY ADVS.SRI.S.ANIL KUMAR (TRIVANDRUM) SRI.K.S.HARIHARAN NAIR SRI.M.RAJAGOPAL RESPONDENT(S): 1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2, OFFICE OF THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, WARD 2, OFFICE OF THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PALAKKAD RANGE, PALAKKAD, 678001 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) IS. PRESS ROAD, KOCHI 682018 R BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13-04-2018,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX //TRUE COPY// SD/- P.A. TO JUDGE P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C).No.11910 of 2018 = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 13[th] day of April, 2018 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is an assessee under the Income Tax Act(the Act) on the rolls of the first respondent. Aggrieved byExt.P1 assessment order, the petitioner preferred Ext.P2appeal before the second respondent. Ext.P5 is the applicationfor stay preferred by the petitioner in Ext.P2 appeal. Thegrievance of the petitioner in the writ petition concerns thedelay on the part of the second respondent in passing orderson Ext.P5 application for stay. It is alleged by the petitioner inthe writ petition that proceedings have already been initiatedfor realisation of the amounts covered by Ext.P1 order. Thepetitioner, therefore, seeks appropriate directions in thisregard, in this writ petition. 2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner asalso 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 petition directing the second respondent to take a decision on Ext.P5application for stay, within two months from the date of receipt ofa copy of this judgment. Ordered accordingly. Needless to saythat until orders are passed on Ext.P5 application for stay, furtherproceedings for realisation of the amounts covered by Ext.P1assessment order shall be deferred. Sd/- P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE. SKS