Case LawHigh Court › Wp(C)/5397/2016 Of Kerala State Beverage...

Wp(C)/5397/2016 Of Kerala State Beverages Corporation Limited v. Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax

High Court 12 Feb 2016 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Wp(C)/5397/2016 Of Kerala State Beverages Corporation Limited v. Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax
Date of order
12 Feb 2016
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

Case summary

In Wp(C)/5397/2016 Of Kerala State Beverages Corporation Limited v. Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax, the High Court (2016) 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 A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2016/23RD MAGHA, 1937 WP(C).No. 5397 of 2016 (Y) --------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- KERALA STATE BEVERAGES (M&M) CORPORATION LIMITED, SASTHAMANGALAM, TRIVANDRUM - 695 010, REP. BY COMPANY SECRETARY JOHN JOSEPH. BY ADVS.SRI.ANIL D. NAIR SRI.R.SREEJITH SMT.O.A.NURIYA KUM.SOUMYA PRAKASH KUM.MEKHALA M.BENNY RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SPECIAL RANGE, TRIVANDRUM - 695 001. SPECIAL RANGE, TRIVANDRUM - 695 001. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), TRIVANDRUM - 695 001. BY SRI.K.M.V.PANDALAI, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12-02-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: mbr/ WP(C).No. 5397 of 2016 (Y) -------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS: ------------------------------------- mbr/ A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J. =========================================== W.P.(C). No. 5397 of 2016 ===================================================== Dated this the 12[th] day of February, 2016 JUDGMENT Against Ext.P1 assessment order passed under the IncomeTax Act, the petitioner preferred Ext.P2 appeal and Ext.P3 staypetition before the 2[nd] respondent. It is the case of the petitionerthat even before the consideration of the stay petition by the 2[nd]respondent, recovery steps have been initiated for recovery of theamounts confirmed against the petitioner by Ext.P1 order. 2.I have heard the learned counsel appearing for thepetitioner as also the learned Government Pleader appearing forthe respondents. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the caseand the submissions made across the bar, I dispose the writpetition with a direction to the 2[nd] respondent to consider and passorders on Ext.P3 stay petition preferred by the petitioner beforehim, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of acopy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner. Recovery stepsfor recovery of amounts confirmed against the petitioner by Ext.P1order, shall be kept in abeyance till such time as the 2[nd] respondentpasses orders as directed and communicates the same to the W.P.(C). No. 5397 of 2016 petitioner. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petitiontogether with a copy of this judgment before the 2[nd] respondent forfurther action. Sd/-A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR 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