Wp(C)/4618/2020 Of Equity Intelligence India Private Limited v. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax
High Court
18 Feb 2020 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Wp(C)/4618/2020 Of Equity Intelligence India Private Limited v. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax
Date of order
18 Feb 2020
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Wp(C)/4618/2020 Of Equity Intelligence India Private Limited v. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, the High Court (2020) decided the matter.
Decision: In such circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the second respondent to considerthe prayer in IA Ext.P6, as expeditiously as possible, atany rate, within a period of one month from the date ofreceipt of a certified copy of this judgment.
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 AMIT RAWAL
TUESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 29TH MAGHA, 1941WP(C).No.4618 OF 2020(B)
PETITIONER:
EQUITY INTELLIGENCE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITEDREPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, ABHILASH VARGHESE, 5TH FLOOR, AREEKAL MANSION, MANORAMA JUNCTION, MAIN AVENUE, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, COCHIN-682 036.
BY ADV. SRI.P.K.RAVISANKAR
RESPONDENTS:
BY SRI JOSE JOSEPH, STANDING COUNSEL
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON18.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Petitioner has chosen to approach this Court under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India, against theinaction of the Income Tax Authority in not taking up theappeal as also the interim application preferred againstthe assessment order dated 27.12.2019 (Ext.P2), andduring its pendency have been served with a demand topay the amount vide letter dated 12.02.2020 (Ext.P10).
3.Sri.Jose Joseph, the learned Standing Counselfor Income Tax, submits that the matter can be disposedof with a direction to the 2[nd] respondent-Commissioner ofIncome Tax (Appeals) to take a decision on the appealand the stay application, in accordance with law.
4.Having heard the learned counsel on bothsides, without expressing any opinion on merits, keepingin view the fact that the petitioner's appeal is pendingsince 22.02.2020 along with interim prayer, which hasnot been even numbered, the petitioner cannot be
rendered remedyless, particularly when Ext.P10 demand
during the interregnum has been issued.
In such circumstances, this writ petition is disposed
of with a direction to the second respondent to considerthe prayer in IA Ext.P6, as expeditiously as possible, atany rate, within a period of one month from the date ofreceipt of a certified copy of this judgment. Till such time,the operation of the demand Ext.P10 is ordered to bekept in abeyance. This interim order is only till a decisionis taken on the application for stay.
Skk//22022020
Sd/-
AMIT RAWAL, JUDGE
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1TRUE COPY OF THE ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION OF THE PETITIONER COMPANYTHE PETITIONER COMPANY
EXHIBIT P2TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF ASSESSMENT DATED 27.12.2019 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT27.12.2019 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P3TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO.6 OF 2016 DATED 29.2.2016 ISSUED BY THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MINISTRYOF FINANCE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA29.2.2016 ISSUED BY THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MINISTRYOF FINANCE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
EXHIBIT P4TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE OF DEMAND DATED 27.12.2019 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT27.12.2019 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P5TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED NIL SUBMITTED ON 22.1.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER COMPANY BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENTNIL SUBMITTED ON 22.1.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER COMPANY BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P5(A)TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF RECEIPT DATED 22.1.2020DATED 22.1.2020
EXHIBIT P6TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED NIL FILED ON 28.1.2020 BY THE PETITIONER COMPANY BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT28.1.2020 BY THE PETITIONER COMPANY BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P6 (A)TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT DATED 28.1.2020 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT28.1.2020 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P7TRUE COPY OF THE RECTIFICATION PETITION DATED22.1.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER COMPANYBEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT22.1.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER COMPANYBEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P8TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FOR STAY 22.1.2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER COMPANY BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENTFILED BY THE PETITIONER COMPANY BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P9TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 4.2.2020 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT REJECTING THE RECTIFICATION PETITION1ST RESPONDENT REJECTING THE RECTIFICATION PETITION
EXHIBIT P6 (A)TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT DATED 28.1.2020 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT28.1.2020 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P7TRUE COPY OF THE RECTIFICATION PETITION DATED22.1.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER COMPANYBEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT22.1.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER COMPANYBEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P8TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FOR STAY 22.1.2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER COMPANY BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENTFILED BY THE PETITIONER COMPANY BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P9TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 4.2.2020 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT REJECTING THE RECTIFICATION PETITION1ST RESPONDENT REJECTING THE RECTIFICATION PETITION
EXHIBIT P10TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 12.2.2020 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER COMPANYISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER COMPANY
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:
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.