Wp(C)/31198/2018 Of Babu Rajendra Prasad v. The Assisant Commissioner Of Income Tax
High Court
21 Nov 2018 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Wp(C)/31198/2018 Of Babu Rajendra Prasad v. The Assisant Commissioner Of Income Tax
Date of order
21 Nov 2018
Assessment year(s)
1999-2000
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Wp(C)/31198/2018 Of Babu Rajendra Prasad v. The Assisant Commissioner Of Income Tax, the High Court (2018) decided the matter.
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 DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU WEDNESDAY,THE 21ST DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018 / 30TH KARTHIKA,1940
WP(C).No. 31198 of 2018
PETITIONER/S:
BABU RAJENDRA PRASADAGED 69 YEARSARUNODAYAM BUNGALOW, MAMPALLIKUNNAM, CHATHANNOR P.O., KOLLAM - 691 572.BY ADVS.SRI.ANIL D. NAIRSRI.ACHYUT K PADMARAJSRI.SREEJITH R.NAIR
RESPONDENT/S:
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21.11.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C). No. 31198 of 2018
JUDGMENT
The petitioner had its business premises searched in 1995.Then the Department seized 800 gms. of gold and completed theassessment in 2004. Because of the search and seizure, theDepartment exercised statutory lien, through Ext.P4, over thepetitioner's property.
2.Later, the Department passed the Ext.P1 consequentialorder. As seen from it, the petitioner is entitled to a refund ofRs.3,18,368/-, but the department desires to adjust it towards thedemand due for the assessment year 1999-2000. Thus adjusted, thepetitioner wants to pay the balance amount and get the lien lifted. Inthat regard, he has submitted the Ext.P6 representation. Seeking itsconsideration, he has filed this writ petition.
3.In response to the submissions made by the petitioner'scounsel, the Standing Counsel assures the Court that if the petitionerundertakes to pay the arrears due to the department, it will certainlylift the lien in accordance with law. Besides that, it will also releasethe remaining gold, for earlier the Department returned a part of theseized gold to the petitioner.
Under these circumstances, I dispose of the writ petition
holding that the department will consider the petitioner's Ext.P6
representation and pass orders, expeditiously, in one month.
Sd/-
DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU
JUDGE
das
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 22.2.2018 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENTISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P2TRUE COPY OF RECTIFICATION APPLICATIONDATED 25.4.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERDATED 25.4.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
EXHIBIT P3TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 14.5.2018 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENTISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P4TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 8TH JANUARY,2004 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER2004 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER
EXHIBIT P5TRUE COPY OF REQUEST DATED 11.6.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 3RDRESPONDENTSUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 3RDRESPONDENT
W.P.(C). No. 31198 of 2018
EXHIBIT P6TRUE COPY OF REQUEST DATED 23.8.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1STRESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P7TRUE COPY OF INVENTORY SEIZED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH
EXHIBIT P8
TYPED COPY OF THE INVENTORY SEIZED
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.