Case LawHigh Court › Wp(C)/31577/2006 Of Mr.t.t.k.vaidyan,Tri...

Wp(C)/31577/2006 Of Mr.t.t.k.vaidyan,Trivandrum v. The Income Tax Officer,Ward-I

High Court 12 Mar 2012 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Wp(C)/31577/2006 Of Mr.t.t.k.vaidyan,Trivandrum v. The Income Tax Officer,Ward-I
Date of order
12 Mar 2012
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In Wp(C)/31577/2006 Of Mr.t.t.k.vaidyan,Trivandrum v. The Income Tax Officer,Ward-I, the High Court (2012) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.

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 ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH 2012/22ND PHALGUNA 1933 WP(C).No. 31577 of 2006 (H) --------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- MR. T.T.K. VAIDYAN, (THENGUMVILAYIL KOCHUKOSHY VAIDYAN), BELLA VISTA, OPPOSITE RAJ BHAVAN, KOWDIAR THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 003. BY ADV. SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN RESPONDENT(S):-------------------------- 1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - I(3), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV.SRI.JOSE JOSEPH,SC SRI.GEORGE K. GEORGE, SC FOR IT THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12-03-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO.31577 OF 2006(H) -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 12[th] day of March, 2012 J U D G M E N T Leaned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the writpetition has become infructuous. Submission is recorded. Writpetition is dismissed as infructuous. vi/ (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ Get help with an income-tax notice → 💬 Ask our CA
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan