Case LawHigh Court › Wp(C)/5079/2013 Of Anil Kumar Sharma v....

Wp(C)/5079/2013 Of Anil Kumar Sharma v. Commissioner Of Income Tax

High Court 27 Feb 2013 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Wp(C)/5079/2013 Of Anil Kumar Sharma v. Commissioner Of Income Tax
Date of order
27 Feb 2013
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Wp(C)/5079/2013 Of Anil Kumar Sharma v. Commissioner Of Income Tax, the High Court (2013) 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 ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2013/8TH PHALGUNA 1934 PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- WP(C).No. 5079 of 2013 (H) -------------------------- ANIL KUMAR SHARMA AGED 40 YEARS 8/2117-A, SHARMA NIKETAN, GUJARATHI ROAD MATTANCHERRY, COCHIN-2. BY ADV. SRI.SAIBY JOSE KIDANGOOR RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX COCHIN COMMISSIONERATE, I.S. PRESS ROAD, COCHIN-18. 2. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, 2ND FLOOR THARAKKANDOM CENTRE, BANERJEE ROAD, COCHIN-18. THARAKKANDOM CENTRE, BANERJEE ROAD, COCHIN-18. 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, 2ND FLOOR THARAKKANDOM CENTRE, BANERJEE ROAD, COCHIN-18. THARAKKANDOM CENTRE, BANERJEE ROAD, COCHIN-18. 4. THE DISTRICT VALUATION OFFICER VALUATION CELL, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, 611 ANNA SALAI 5TH FLOOR, KANNAMMAI BUILDING, CHENNAI-600006. 5TH FLOOR, KANNAMMAI BUILDING, CHENNAI-600006. BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27-02-2013, THECOURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 5079 of 2013 (H) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS EXT.P1TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE BEARING F. NO. DVO/MDS/CG(15)/2011-12 DATED 19-3-12 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT.DATED 19-3-12 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P2TRUE COPY OF THE COVERING LETTER DATED 23-3-12 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER.THE PETITIONER.EXT.P3TRUE COPY OF THE FAIR VALUE REPORT OF THE SUB REGISTRAR, MARADU SRO DATED NIL. MARADU SRO DATED NIL. EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT BEARING F. NO.DVO/MDS/CG(15)/11-12 DATED 26-7-12.DVO/MDS/CG(15)/11-12 DATED 26-7-12.EXT.P5TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT BY THE DVO CALICUT BEARING NO. 43:2130 DATED 5-11-12 DATED 5-11-12 EXT.P6TRUE COPY OF THE REPORTS BY THE DVO TRIVANDRUM BEARING NO. 45:1433 DATED 12-6-12. 45:1433 DATED 12-6-12. EXT.P7TRUE COPY OF OBJECTIONS DATED 7-2-13 FILED BY THE PETITIONER. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE SKV ANTONY DOMINIC, J - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C).5079/2013 - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 27[th] day of February, 2013 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - JUDGMENT Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner andthe learned Standing Counsel appearing for therespondents. 2.Petitioner's grievance is mainly regarding Ext.P4,a valuation report concerning 68.064 cents of landcomprised in R.S.216/1, 216/2, 216/3 and 216/5 of BlockNo.15 of Kumbalam Village, Kanayannur Taluk. Onreceipt of a copy of the valuation report, petitionerfiled Ext.P7 objection before the 3[rd]respondentobjecting to Ext.P4 and also seeking a fresh valuation.It is at that stage this writ petition is filed with aprayer mainly to invalidate Ext.P4. 3.Learned Standing Counsel for the respondentssubmits that the matter is still not finalised and thatthe 3[rd] respondent is yet to hear the petitioner and pass final orders in the matter. In that view of thematter, I am inclined to think that this writ petitionis premature. Therefore, I dispose of this writ petitiondirecting that the 3[rd]respondent will hear thepetitioner, consider Ext.P4 in the light of Ext.P7objection filed by the petitioner and pass final ordersin the matter. This shall be done as expeditiously aspossible, at any rate, within three months of receiptof a copy of this judgment. Sd/- ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE mrcs /true copy/ sd/- P.A. To 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