Wp(C)/31005/2013 Of Pandarathiparmbu Mohammed Ashraf v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2013/29TH AGRAHAYANA, 1935 WP(C).No. 31005 of 2013 (A) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- PANDARATHIPARMBU MOHAMMED ASHRAF, HOUSE NO.IX/485, EDACHIRA, THENGODU POST, KAKKANADU, PIN 682 021. BY ADVS.SRI.BABU CHERUKARA SMT.ROSAMMA MATHEW SRI.K.K.ALIAS SRI.P.A.SALIM SRI.ANZAR BASHEER SRI.P.ANTO THOMAS SRI.K.S.GIREESAN RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, C.P.C. POST BAG NO.1, ELECTRONIC CITY POST OFFICE,BANGALURU, PIN 560 100. 2. INCOME TAX COMMISSIONER, INCOME TAX COMMISSIONERATE, I.S.PRESS ROAD ERNAKULAM, COCHIN-18. R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, INCOME TAX THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20-12-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 31005 of 2013 (A) ------------------------------------------ APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBIT: ---------------------------------------- EXT.P1 - TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR REFUND UNDER FORM ITR-V DATED 17-7-2013. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: ------------------------------------------ N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ========================W.P.(C). No. 31005 of 2013 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 20[th] day of December, 2013 JUDGMENT The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, someamount is due from the respondent department to the petitioner andseeking for refund vide Ext.P1 application before the first respondent.The prayer is only to cause the same to be considered and finalizedwithin a reasonable time. 2. Heard the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 3. After hearing both the sides, the writ petition is disposed of,directing the first respondent to consider and pass appropriate orderson Ext.P1 application in accordance with law after giving anopportunity of hearing to the petitioner, at the earliest, at any rate,within 'two months' from the date of receipt of a copy of thisjudgment. It is made clear that, this Court has not expressed anythingwith regard to the merits involved or as to the eligibility of thepetitioner to have the amount disbursed, which is to be considered bythe first respondent. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment along with acopy of the writ petition before the first respondent for further steps. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE.