Wp(C)/19887/2012 Of Smt. Ammini Karnan v. Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF AUGUST 2012/31ST SRAVANA 1934 WP(C).No. 19887 of 2012 (I) --------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ SMT. AMMINI KARNAN, PROPRIETRIX,KKR MILLS,KKR BUILDING, MC.ROAD,OKKAL,KALADY, KERALA-683 550. BY ADVS.SRI.GEORGE JOHNSON SRI.MANOJ V.S. RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ALUVA RANGE,ALUVA - 683 101. ALUVA RANGE,ALUVA - 683 101. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS-2), ERNAKULAM - 682 018. ERNAKULAM - 682 018. 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II, CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING,I.S.PRESS ROAD, KOCHI-682 018. KOCHI-682 018. R1 TO R3 BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, INCOME TAX THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22-08-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.19887/2012 I APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT DT.21/12/2011. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE OF DEMAND UNDER SECTION 156 OF THEINCOME TAX ACT,1961 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT DT.21/12/2011. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL AND STAY PETITION FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DT.20/01/2012. EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BEFORE THE 3RDRESPONDENT DT.20/03/2012. EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT IN EXT.P4 DT.03/07/2012. EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE PETITIONERBEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DT.23/07/2012. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS; N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P. (C) No. 19887 of 2012~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Dated, this the 22[nd] day of August, 2012 JUDGMENT Being aggrieved of Ext. P1 assessment order passed bythe first respondent, the petitioner availed statutory remedyby filing Ext. P3 appeal along with a petition for stay and theyare pending consideration before the second respondent.Because of the coercive proceedings, the petitioner was alsoconstrained to move Ext. P4 stay petition before the 3[rd]respondent, which led to Ext. P5 order directing the petitionerto satisfy 50 % of the outstanding liability in the manner asspecified therein. According to the petitioner, the conditionso imposed is highly arbitrary, more so when, the issue iscovered in favour of the petitioner. 2. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 3. Considering the facts circumstances, the secondrespondent is directed to consider I. A. for stay, if any,forming part of Ext. P3 appeal and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of copy of thisjudgment. Status quo shall be maintained till such time.Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along withcopy of writ petition before the second respondent for furthersteps. The Writ Petition is disposed of. sd/- P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, (JUDGE) kmd