Wp(C)/13811/2011 Of M/S. Kadakkal Educational Trust v. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1 & Ors

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 24TH MAY 2011 / 3RD JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 13811 of 2011(B) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- M/S.KADAKKAL EDUCATION TRUST, KADAKKAL VILLAGE, PULIPPARA P.O, KADAKKAL , KOLLAM- 695 136,REP.BY ITS MANAGING TRUSTEE SHRI.MOHAMMED RASHEED. BY ADVS. SRI.T.M.SREEDHARAN, SMT.C.K.SHERIN, SRI.V.P.NARAYANAN. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD NO.1, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), AYYAKKAR BHAVAN,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AYYAKKAR BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/05/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 24[th] day of May, 2011 J U D G M E N T---------------------- Against Ext.P1 order of assessment finalised with respect to the year 2008-'09, the petitioner hadpreferred statutory appeal before the 2[nd] respondent asevidenced from Ext.P3. Ext.P3(a) is the petition seekingstay, filed along with the appeal before the 2[nd] respondent.According to the petitioner, the appeal as well as theaccompanying application is pending consideration anddisposal before the 2[nd] respondent. Apprehension of thepetitioner is that the respondents may take coercive stepsfor recovery, without considering pendency of the appeal.Hence interference of this court is sought for to restrain therecovery steps till the disposal of the appeal. 2.Considering the fact that the appellate authorityis in seizin of the matter, I am not proposing to enter uponany adjudication regarding merits of the impugnedassessment. I am of the view that interest of justice will beserved if a direction is issued to the 2[nd] respondent toexpedite the matter. 3.Accordingly the writ petition is disposed of directingthe 2[nd] respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders onExt.P3(a) stay petition filed along with the appeal, after affordingan opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as early as possible,at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of receiptof a copy of this judgment. 4.Till such time orders are issued by the 2[nd] respondentas directed above, recovery of amounts covered under Ext.P1shall be kept in abeyance. 5.The petitioner will produce a copy of this judgmentbefore the 2[nd] respondent. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb