Wp(C)/18510/2023 Of Lakeshore Hospital And Research Centre Ltd v. The Income Tax Officer (Tds), Kochi (2)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS WEDNESDAY, THE 7 DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 17TH JYAISHTA, 1945WP(C) NO. 18510 OF 2023 PETITIONER: LAKESHORE HOSPITAL AND RESEARCH CENTRE LTD.AGED 72 YEARS XVI/612 NH47 BYPASS, P.O NETTOOR, ERNAKULAM, KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR S.K. ABDULLA., PIN – 682040 BY ADVS.ABRAHAM JOSEPH MARKOS V.ABRAHAM MARKOS ISAAC THOMAS ALEXANDER JOSEPH MARKOSSHARAD JOSEPH KODANTHARA RESPONDENTS: 1THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), KOCHI (2)PIN – 682018PIN – 682018 CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING I.S. PRESS ROAD, KOCHI, 2THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL SCHEME, NEW DELHI., PIN – 110001NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL SCHEME, NEW DELHI., PIN – 110001 3DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXI.S. PRESS ROAD, KOCHI., PIN – 682018I.S. PRESS ROAD, KOCHI., PIN – 682018 CORPORATE CIR 1(1), KOCHI CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON07.06.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Dated this the 7[th] day of June,2023 J U D G M E N T The writ petition is filed to direct the secondrespondent to consider and dispose of Ext P2 appealand Ext P3 stay petition, expeditiously and until suchtime, to defer all further proceedings pursuant toExt P1 assessment order. 2.The petitioner’s case is that, aggrieved byExt P1 assessment order, the petitioner has preferredExt P2 appeal and Ext P3 stay petition before thesecond respondent on 28.04.2023. Notwithstanding thefiling of Exts P2 & P3, the respondents are threateningto enforce Ext P1 order through Ext P5 letter. Hence,the writ petition. 3.Heard; Sri. Abraham Joseph Markos, thelearned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Heard; Sri. Abraham Joseph Markos, the Sri.Christopher Abraham, the learned standing counselappearing for the respondents. 4.Having considered the pleadings andmaterials on record and taking note of the fact thatExt P3 stay petition is pending consideration before thesecond respondent since 28.04.2023, I deem itappropriate to dispose of the writ petition in thefollowing manner: (i)The second respondent is directed to considerand dispose of Ext P3 stay petition, inaccordance with law and as expeditiously aspossible, at any rate, within a period of threemonths from the date of receipt of a certifiedcopy of this judgment, after affording thepetitioner an opportunity of being heard.and dispose of Ext P3 stay petition, inaccordance with law and as expeditiously aspossible, at any rate, within a period of threemonths from the date of receipt of a certifiedcopy of this judgment, after affording thepetitioner an opportunity of being heard. (ii) Needless to mention that, if the secondrespondent proposes to pass a conditional orderof stay, he shall state reasons for the same. respondent proposes to pass a conditional orderof stay, he shall state reasons for the same. W.P.(C)No.18510/2023 -:4:- (iii) Until such time orders are passed on Ext P3stay petition, all further proceedings pursuantto Exts P1 & P5 shall stand deferred. Sd/- C.S.DIAS,JUDGE DST/07.06.23 //True copy//P.A.To Judge -:5:- APPENDIX PETITIONER EXHIBITSEXHIBIT P1TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 30.03.2023PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.EXHIBIT P2TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 28.04.2023FILED AGAINST EXHIBIT P1 ORDER BEFORE THE2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P3STAY PETITION DATED 28.04.2023 FILED BY THEPETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENTEXHIBIT P4TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED15.05.2023 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORETHE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P5TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 17.05.2023ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT RESPONDENT’S EXHIBITS: NIL