Wp(C)/28212/2012 Of V.uthaman v. Income Tax Officer
High Court
28 Nov 2012 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Wp(C)/28212/2012 Of V.uthaman v. Income Tax Officer
Date of order
28 Nov 2012
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Wp(C)/28212/2012 Of V.uthaman v. Income Tax Officer, the High Court (2012) decided the matter.
Decision: Writ Petition is disposed of as above.
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 ANTONY DOMINIC
WEDNESDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2012/7TH AGRAHAYANA 1934
WP(C).No. 28212 of 2012 (B)
---------------------------
PETITIONER(S):-------------
V.UTHAMAN, ARUN NIVAS, ERAMALLOOR P.O., CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN: 688 524. BY ADV. SRI.A.KRISHNAN
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------
1. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -4, ALAPPUZHA-688 011.
2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), IV, KERA BHAVAN, ERNAKULAM-682 016. KERA BHAVAN, ERNAKULAM-682 016.
BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC FOR INCOME TAX
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28-11-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 28212 of 2012
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:NIL
/TRUE COPY/
VPV
P.A. TO JUDGE
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
--------------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) NO.28212 OF 2012(B)
--------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 28[th] day of November, 2012
J U D G M E N T
Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the StandingCounsel for the respondents. Aggrieved by Ext.P1 order ofassessment passed against the petitioner for the assessmentyear 2008-2009, petitioner filed Ext.P3 appeal along with Ext.P4stay petition. In the appeal, petitioner has also soughtcondonation of delay of 30 days in filing the appeal. The appealand other applications are pending consideration of the 2[nd]respondent. In the meanwhile, apprehending recovery inpursuance to Ext.P1 assessment order and Ext.P2 demandnotice, the Writ Petition is filed.
2. The appeal or the stay petition can be considered only ifthe delay in filing the appeal is condoned as prayed for.Therefore, the appellate authority should first consider theapplication filed by the petitioner for condonation of delay. Thisthe appellate authority shall do as expeditiously as possible and
at any rate within 8 weeks from the date of production of a copyof the judgment. If delay is condoned, within the aforesaid timeorders on Ext.P4 stay petition shall also be passed. In themeantime, further proceedings pursuant to Exts.P1 and P2assessment order and demand notice will be kept in abeyance.
Petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment along witha copy of the writ petition before the 2[nd] respondent forcompliance.
Writ Petition is disposed of as above.
(ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE
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.