Case LawHigh Court › Wp(C)/19702/2020 Of Seven Star Enterpris...

Wp(C)/19702/2020 Of Seven Star Enterprises v. Income Tax Officer

High Court 23 Sep 2020 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Wp(C)/19702/2020 Of Seven Star Enterprises v. Income Tax Officer
Date of order
23 Sep 2020
Assessment year(s)
2009-10, 2010-11, 2010-1127
Outcome
Other

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Wp(C)/19702/2020 Of Seven Star Enterprises v. Income Tax Officer, the High Court (2020) decided the matter.

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 A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2020 / 1ST ASWINA, 1942 WP(C).No.19702 OF 2020(K) PETITIONER/S: SEVEN STAR ENTERPRISESXXII/409, SAGARASREE, SOUTH NADA KODUNGALLUR, THRISSUR-680 664REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER K.P BINUBY ADVS.SRI.ANIL D. NAIRSRI.R.SREEJITHSMT.TELMA RAJUSMT.SRI HARINI S.P. RESPONDENT/S: 1INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(5)THRISSUR- 680 001 2THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,AAYAKAR BHAVAN, RANGE-1S.T NAGAR, THRISSUR- 680 001SRI.JOSE JOSEPH; SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON23.09.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2 JUDGMENT The petitioner has preferred Exts.P3 and P4 applications before the 2ndrespondent under Section 119(2) of the Income Tax Act for condoning a delay inthe filing of returns. The limited prayer at this stage is for a direction to the 2ndrespondent to consider and pass orders on the same expeditiously, after hearingthe petitioner. 2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learnedGovernment Pleader for the respondents. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and thesubmissions made across the Bar, I dispose the writ petition with a direction to the2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Exts.P3 and P4 applicationspreferred by the petitioner within an outer limit of four weeks from the date ofreceipt of a copy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner. The petitioner shallproduce a copy of the writ petition together with a copy of the judgment before the2nd respondent for further action. Sd/- A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIARJUDGE SJ 3 PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: APPENDIX EXHIBIT P1TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF FILINGRETURNS FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 EXHIBIT P2TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF FILINGRETURNS FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 EXHIBIT P3TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION DATED 1.02.2016FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF SEPARATE APPLICATION DATED27.11.2018 FILED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE A.Y2009-10 AND A.Y-2010-1127.11.2018 FILED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE A.Y2009-10 AND A.Y-2010-11 EXHIBIT P5TRUE COPY OF REMINDER DATED 7.12.2017 FILEDBEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENTBEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P6TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 23.04.2018 ISSUEDBY THE 1ST RESPONDENTBY THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P7TRUE COPY OF POSTING NOTICE DATED 1.7.2019ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ Get help with an income-tax notice → 💬 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