Wp(C)/4593/2011 Of C.k.santhosh Kumar v. The Income Tax Officer, Kochi

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 27TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 4593 of 2011(Y) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- C.K. SANTHOSH KUMAR, PROPRIETOR, V.GUARD INDUSTRIES LTD., QUALITY CONTROL SECTION, LFC ROAD, KALOOR, ERNAKULAM-682 017. BY ADV. SRI.T.M.SREEDHARAN, SMT.C.K.SHERIN, SRI.V.P.NARAYANAN. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD NO.3(3), KOCHI. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-11, KERA BHAVAN, SRV HIGH SCHOOL ROAD, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-11. R1 & R2 BY ADV. MR.JOSE JOSEPH, SC. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/02/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.4593 of 2011 ------------------------------- Dated this the 16[th] day of February, 2011. J U D G M E N T Aggrieved by Ext.P1 order of assessment finalised anddemand notice issued, the petitioner had preferred statutoryappeal before the second respondent as evidenced fromExt.P2. Along with the appeal, Ext.P2(a) petition was filedseeking stay of recovery of the amounts, pending disposal ofthe appeal. Meanwhile, through Ext.P3, the petitioner hadapproached the assessing authority seeking to keep inabeyance collection of the tax amounts, till the disposal ofthe appeal. In Ext.P5, the assessing authority had declinedhis request and directed the petitioner to make payment ofthe amounts due in two instalments by 31.3.2011. 2. Petitioner is challenging Ext.P5 as well as seekingdirection against the second respondent for considerationand disposal of Ext.P2 appeal. It is further prayed that, tillthe disposal of the appeal, the recovery steps shall bedirected to be kept in abeyance. W.P.(C).No.4593 of 2011 3. Considering the fact that the statutory appeal aswell as the accompanying stay petition are pendingconsideration and disposal before the second respondent, Iam of the view that the writ petition can be disposed ofdirecting the appellate authority to consider and passorders on the stay petition at the earliest. 4. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing the second respondent to consider and pass orders onExt.P2(a) stay petition, after affording an opportunity ofhearing to the petitioner, as early as possible, at any ratewithin a period of one month from the date of receipt of acopy of this judgment. 5. Till such time, orders are passed by the secondrespondent as directed above, collection and recovery ofamounts covered under Ext.P1 order of assessment shall bekept in abeyance. ami/ C.K.ABDUL REHIM, Judge