Wp(C)/2553/2020 Of Sm Silks And Sarees v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax
High Court
30 Jan 2020 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Wp(C)/2553/2020 Of Sm Silks And Sarees v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax
Date of order
30 Jan 2020
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Wp(C)/2553/2020 Of Sm Silks And Sarees v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, the High Court (2020) decided the matter.
Decision: With these observations and directions, the above Writ Petition(Civil) stands finally disposed of.
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 ALEXANDER THOMAS
THURSDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF JANUARY 2020 / 10TH MAGHA, 1941WP(C).No.2553 OF 2020(T)
PETITIONER:
SM SILKS AND SAREESMARKET ROAD, CHANGANCHERRY KAVALA, CHANGANACHERRY, REPRESENTED BY ITS DESIGNATE PARTNER, SANTHOSH.
BY ADVS.SRI.K.SRIKUMAR (SR.)SRI.K.MANOJ CHANDRAN
RESPONDENTS:
1THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXOFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE, ALAPPUZHA-688 010.OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE, ALAPPUZHA-688 010.
2THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS),KOTTAYAM-686001.KOTTAYAM-686001.
SRI JOSE JOSEPH SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON30.01.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.
===========================
W.P(C) No.2553 of 2020
===========================
Dated this the 30[th] day of January, 2020
JUDGMENT
Against Ext.P1 order, the petitioner has filed Ext.P3 appeal andExt.P4 stay petition. The petitioner's grievance is that during the pendencyof the stay petition, Ext.P2 demand notice has been issued for enforcementof the impugned Ext.P1 order by the assessing authority for recovery of thedisputed amounts.
2.Heard Sri.K.Srikumar, learned Senior Counsel instructed bySri.K.Manoj Chandran, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner andSri.Jose Joseph, learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents.
3.After hearing both sides and after taking note of the facts andcircumstances of the case, it is ordered in the interest of justice that the 2[nd]respondent shall take up the matters in Ext.P4 stay application filed inExt.P3 appeal and after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard tothe petitioner through their authorised representative/counsel, if any, shallpass orders on that application without much delay, preferably within a
period of two months from the date of production of a certified copy of this
judgment. Until orders are thus passed on the abovesaid Ext.P4 stayapplication, further coercive steps pursuant to Ext.P-2 demand notice forenforcement of the impugned Ext.P1 order will be kept in abeyance.
With these observations and directions, the above Writ Petition(Civil) stands finally disposed of.
Sd/-
ALEXANDER THOMASJUDGE
vgd
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1
TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 27.12.2019.
EXHIBIT P2
TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE OF DEMAND DATED 27.12.2019.
EXHIBIT P3
TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 03.01.2020.
EXHIBIT P3(A)
TRUE COPY OF ADDITIONAL GROUNDS DATED 22.01.2020.
EXHIBIT P4EXHIBIT P5
TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION
TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FOR URGENT HEARING.
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.