Wp(C)/33693/2017 Of M/S. Kosamattam Finance Ltd v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax
High Court
23 Oct 2017 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Wp(C)/33693/2017 Of M/S. Kosamattam Finance Ltd v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax
Date of order
23 Oct 2017
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Wp(C)/33693/2017 Of M/S. Kosamattam Finance Ltd v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, the High Court (2017) decided the matter.
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 K.VINOD CHANDRAN
MONDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF OCTOBER 2017/1ST KARTHIKA, 1939
WP(C).No. 33693 of 2017 (J)
----------------------------
PETITIONER(S):----------------------
M/S. KOSAMATTAM FINANCE LTD,
KOSAMATTAM MKC BUILDING, MARKET JUNCTION,
M.L ROAD, KOTTAYAM - 686 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, SHRI.MATHEW K. CHERIAN.
BY ADVS.SRI.T.M.SREEDHARAN (SR.) SMT.DIVYA RAVINDRAN
RESPONDENT(S):
------------------------
1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM - 686 001. CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM - 686 001.
2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) -III, POORNIMA BUILDING, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, KOCHI - 682 036. POORNIMA BUILDING, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, KOCHI - 682 036.
BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23-10-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
TS
WP(C).No. 33693 of 2017 (J)
---------------------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
------------------------------------
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER 31.08.2017 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 30.11.2016 ISSUED BY THE ADMINISTRATIVE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX. ADMINISTRATIVE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 27.09.2017 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 18.10.2017 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 18.10.2017 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT U/S 220(6). BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT U/S 220(6).
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR F. NO. 404/10/2009-ITCC DATED 1.12.2009 ISSUED BY THE CBDT. DATED 1.12.2009 ISSUED BY THE CBDT.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS - NIL
-------------------------------------------------
/TRUE COPY
PS TO JUDGE
K.VINOD CHANDRAN, J.
--------------------------------
W.P.(C)No.33693 of 2017
----------------------------------
Dated this the 23[rd] day of October, 2017JUDGMENT
Ext.P1 is the assessment order, against which the
petitioner filed Ext.P3 appeal, which is accompanied byExt.P4 stay petition before the 2[nd] respondent. The appealand stay petition are pending before the 2[nd] respondent. Inthe meanwhile, coercive proceedings have been initiated. Itis in this context, the writ petition has been filed.
2. In the above circumstances, it is directed that theAppellate Authority, the 2[nd] respondent herein, consider anddispose of Ext.P4 stay application within a period of twomonths from the date of receipt of a certified copy of thisjudgment and the coercive proceedings be stayed until suchorders are passed, which order shall determine theproceedings thereafter.
The writ petition is disposed of without any observation onmerits and keeping in abeyance the recovery till such time as thedirections herein are complied with by the Appellate Authority,whose orders shall determine the further steps thereafter.
Sd/- K.VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE
skj
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.