Wp(C)/19821/2020 Of Finsree Sales And Services Limited v. Income Tax Officer
High Court
24 Sep 2020 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Wp(C)/19821/2020 Of Finsree Sales And Services Limited v. Income Tax Officer
Date of order
24 Sep 2020
Assessment year(s)
2010-11, 2011-12, 2010-1122
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Wp(C)/19821/2020 Of Finsree Sales And Services Limited 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
THURSDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2020 / 2ND ASWINA, 1942
WP(C).No.19821 OF 2020(C)
PETITIONER/S:
FINSERE SALES AND SERVICES LIMITED1ST FLOOR, SAGARASREE COMPLEXOPP. ASOKA THEATRE, SOUTH NADAKODUNGALLUR, THRISSUR-680 664REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR MR. K.P BINU
BY ADVS.SRI.ANIL D. NAIRSREEJITH R NAIRTELMA RAJUSRI HARINI S.P
RESPONDENT/S:
1INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1)THRISSUR- 680 0012THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX.AAYAKAR BHAVAN, RANGE-1S.T NAGAR, THRISSUR- 680 001
OTHER PRESENT:
GP DR. THUSHARA JAMES
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON24.09.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2
JUDGMENT
The petitioner has preferred Exts.P3 to P5 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 andcircumstances of the case and the submissions made across the Bar, I dispose thewrit petition with a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders onExts.P3 to P5 applications preferred by the petitioner within an outer limit of fourweeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after hearing thepetitioner. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petition together with acopy of the judgment before the 2nd respondent for further action.
Sd/-
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIARJUDGE
SJ
3
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
APPENDIX
EXHIBIT P1
TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF FILING
RETURNS FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11
EXHIBIT P2TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF FILING RETURNS FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12RETURNS FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12
EXHIBIT P3TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION DATED 1.02.2016 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENTFILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P4TRUE COPY OF THE SEPARATE APPLICATION DATED22.12.2017 FILED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE A.Y.2010-1122.12.2017 FILED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE A.Y.2010-11
EXHIBIT P5TRUE COPY OF SEPARATE APPLICATION DATED 22.12.2017 FILED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE A.Y2011-1222.12.2017 FILED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE A.Y2011-12
EXHIBIT P6TRUE COPY OF REMINDER DATED 13.03.2018 FILED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENTFILED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P7TRUE COPY OF REMINDER DATED 13.03.2018 FILED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENTFILED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P8TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 9.07.2018 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENTBY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P9TRUE COPY OF POSTING NOTICE DATED 15.10.2018 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.15.10.2018 ISSUED BY THE 2ND 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.