Wp(C)/14612/2022 Of Rajakumari Shopping Mall Llp v. Additional/ Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax
High Court
26 Apr 2022 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Wp(C)/14612/2022 Of Rajakumari Shopping Mall Llp v. Additional/ Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax
Date of order
26 Apr 2022
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Wp(C)/14612/2022 Of Rajakumari Shopping Mall Llp v. Additional/ Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, the High Court (2022) decided the matter.
Decision: The 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 ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.
TUESDAY, THE 26 DAY OF APRIL 2022 / 6TH VAISAKHA, 1944W.P.(C) NO.14612 OF 2022
PETI
TIONER:
RAJAKUMARI SHOPPING MALL LLPAMC 11/1556, CITY PLAZA,NH ROAD, ATTINGAL,TRIVANDRUM-695 101REPRESENTED BY DESIGNATED PARTNER.
BY ADVS.ANIL D. NAIR
TELMA RAJU
EDATHARA VINEETA KRISHNAN
RESPONDENTS:
1ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INCOME TAX OFFICER, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NEW DELHI-110 001.
2PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,AAYAKAR BHAWAN, 4TH FLOOR, KOWDIAR P.O.,TRIVANDRUM-695 003.AAYAKAR BHAWAN, 4TH FLOOR, KOWDIAR P.O.,TRIVANDRUM-695 003.
3INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
1ST FLOOR, BLOCK C-I & C-II,
KENDRIYA BHAVAN, KAKKANAD-682 037
REPRESENTED BY REGISTRAR.
ADV. RESMITHA R. CHANDRAN, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
ADV. CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON26.04.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) NO.14612 OF 2022
-2-
JUDGMENT
Aggrieved by Ext.P1 order of assessment relating toassessment year 2016-17, the petitioner has preferred anappeal before the 3[rd] respondent, a copy of which is producedas Ext.P5. A petition for stay of proceedings pursuant to theassessment order has also been filed as Ext.P6. Petitionerapprehends coercive proceedings to be effected even beforethe petition for stay is considered. Hence this writ petition.
2.Having considered the submissions of the counsel forthe petitioner as well as the respondents, I am of the opinionthat this writ petition itself can be disposed of with a direction.
3.Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 3[rd]respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P6 stay petition,within a period of two months from the date of receipt of acopy of this judgment. Till such a decision is taken, all coerciveproceedings against the petitioner pursuant to Ext.P4 shall bekept in abeyance.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/- ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.JUDGE
W.P.(C) NO.14612 OF 2022
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 14612/2022
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1
TRUE COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 31.12.2018 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P2
TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 08.03.2021 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P3
TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 17.03.2021 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P4
TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 29.03.2021 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P5
TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P6
TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
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.