Case LawHigh Court › Wp(C)/5121/2013 Of M/S Eastern Motors v....

Wp(C)/5121/2013 Of M/S Eastern Motors v. Income Tax Officer

High Court 22 Feb 2013 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Wp(C)/5121/2013 Of M/S Eastern Motors v. Income Tax Officer
Date of order
22 Feb 2013
Assessment year(s)
2007-08
Outcome
Other

Case summary

In Wp(C)/5121/2013 Of M/S Eastern Motors v. Income Tax Officer, the High Court (2013) decided the matter.

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 FRIDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF FEBRUARY 2013/3RD PHALGUNA 1934 WP(C).No. 5121 of 2013 (M) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- M/S EASTERN MOTORS, TOWN HALL JUNCTION,TEMPLE ROAD, HARIPPAD 690 514,REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER C.G. SREEKUMAR. BY ADV. SRI.S.ARUN RAJ RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22-02-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.5121/2013 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- P1:- COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DTD. 28.12.2009 PASSED BY THE ISTRESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2007-08. P2:- COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENTFOR THE AY 2007-08 RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE tss ANTONY DOMINIC, J - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C).5121/2013 - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 22[nd] day of February, 2013 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - JUDGMENT Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learnedStanding Counsel appearing for the respondents. 2.Petitioner is an assessee under the Income Tax Act.Assessment for the year 2007-08 was completed as per Ext.P1.Challenging the assessment order, petitioner filed Ext.P2 appealwithout any application for stay. Appeal is still not heard and inthe meanwhile, 1[st] respondent is initiating recovery proceedings.It is with this allegation this writ petition is filed. In view of the pendency of Ext.P2 appeal, I dispose of thiswrit petition directing that the 2[nd] respondent shall pass ordersthereon, as expeditiously as possible. It is also directed thatsubject to the petitioner remitting 1/3[rd] of the tax due under Ext.P1within four weeks from today, recovery of the balance amount duewill stand stayed, pending disposal of the appeal. mrcs 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.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 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