Case LawHigh Court › Wp(C)/16608/2007 Of Mrs.thresiamma Georg...

Wp(C)/16608/2007 Of Mrs.thresiamma George,Kanjirappally v. The Agricultural Income Tax Officer

High Court 29 Jun 2007 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Wp(C)/16608/2007 Of Mrs.thresiamma George,Kanjirappally v. The Agricultural Income Tax Officer
Date of order
29 Jun 2007
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

Case summary

In Wp(C)/16608/2007 Of Mrs.thresiamma George,Kanjirappally v. The Agricultural Income Tax Officer, the High Court (2007) decided the matter.

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 C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 29TH JUNE 2007 / 8TH ASHADHA 1929 WP(C).No. 16608 of 2007(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ MRS.THRESIAMMA GEORGE, KARIMPANAL, CHAITHANYA, KANJIRAPALLY. BY ADV. SRI.RAMESH CHERIAN JOHN RESPONDENTS: ------------- THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME TAX OFFICER, KANJIRAPPALLY. BY G.P. SRI.C.K. GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/06/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ON 29/06/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.C. NO. 16608 OF 2007 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of June, 2007 JUDGMENT Since the prayer is only for direction to the assessing officer togive effect to Ext.P2 order of the Tribunal, and since GovernmentPleader submitted that assessing officer is in the process of revising theassessment, W.P. is disposed of directing the assessing officer to revisepetitioner's AIT assessment for 1984-85 in terms of the Tribunal's orderif that has become final within a period of one month from the date ofproduction of a copy of this judgment by the petitioner. The Officerwill verify the assessment records and make adjustment of refundagainst demand, if any due, and whatever excess paid by the petitionershould be refunded with eligible interest within two months thereafter. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR)Judge
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan