Wp(C)/13284/2023 Of Grand Jewellers v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)
High Court
12 Apr 2023 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Wp(C)/13284/2023 Of Grand Jewellers v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)
Date of order
12 Apr 2023
Assessment year(s)
2017-2018
Outcome
Allowed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Wp(C)/13284/2023 Of Grand Jewellers v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), the High Court (2023) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: In the above circumstances, this writ petition is allowed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI
WEDNESDAY, THE 12 DAY OF APRIL 2023 / 22ND CHAITHRA, 1945
WP(C) NO. 13284 OF 2023
PETITIONER:
GRAND JEWELLERS348/V. P. ADINJARAYII BUILDINGS, MC ROAD, KOOTHATTUKULAM P.O, ERNAKULAM , PIN – 686662 KERALA, INDIA REPRESENTED BY IT'S PARTNER MR. PRAVEEN KRISHNA GANESANBY ADV K.LATHA
RESPONDENTS:
1THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE (NFAC), DELHI, 245-A, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI, PIN - 1100012THE INCOME TAX OFFICEROFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1, WARD 1 & TPS, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683101SRI. CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, SC.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON12.04.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
T.R. RAVI, J.
--------------------------------------------
W. P. (C). No.13284 of 2023
--------------------------------------------
Dated this the 12[th] day of April, 2023
JUDGMENT
Admit. Standing counsel takes notice for the respondents.
2.The petitioner has challenged Ext.P4 appellate order, whichaccording to the petitioner has been issued without hearing thepetitioner. It is submitted that even though the correct e-mail ID ofthe petitioner is available in the records of the Department, Ext.P5would show that the notice has been sent to a different e-mail ID.
3.The standing counsel fairly submitted that the appeal canbe reconsidered.
In the above circumstances, this writ petition is allowed. Ext.P4order is set aside. There will be a direction to the 1st respondent toreconsider the appeal filed by the petitioner and pass fresh orders inaccordance with law.
Sd/-
T.R. RAVI
JUDGE
Pn
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 13284/2023
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1Exhibit P2
THE TRUE COPY OF THE INCOME TAX PROFILE PAGE OF THE PETITIONER PERSONAL DETAILS
THE TRUE COPY OF THE INCOME TAX ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S 143 (3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2017-2018 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER
Exhibit P3Exhibit P4Exhibit P5Exhibit P5(A)Exhibit P5(B)Exhibit P5(C)
THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL IN FORM NO.35 UNDER RULE 45 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE HE FIRST RESPONDENT THROUGH ONLINE AGAINST THE EXHIBIT P2 ASSESSMENT ORDER
THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPELLATE ORDER DATED 28-2-2023 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT INAPPEAL NO. CIT (A), KOCHI-2/10385/2019-20
THE TRUE COPY OF INTIMATION NOTICE SENT BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER IN EMAIL ID DATED 30-12-2020
THE TRUE COPY OF INTIMATION NOTICE SENT BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER IN EMAIL ID DATED 04-11-2022
THE TRUE COPY OF INTIMATION NOTICE SENT BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER IN EMAIL ID DATED 06-01-2023
THE TRUE COPY OF INTIMATION NOTICE SENT BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER IN EMAIL ID DATED 20-02-2023
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.