Case LawHigh Court › Wp(C)/6386/2012 Of Baby Mathew v. The As...

Wp(C)/6386/2012 Of Baby Mathew v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax

High Court 14 Mar 2012 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Wp(C)/6386/2012 Of Baby Mathew v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax
Date of order
14 Mar 2012
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

Case summary

In Wp(C)/6386/2012 Of Baby Mathew v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, the High Court (2012) decided the matter.

Decision: 3.I am satisfied that before the appellate authority couldconsider and pass orders on Ext.P4 stay petition, it is unjust to initiatecoercive recovery proceedings for recovery of the amount disputed.Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with the followingdirections: The 2[nd] respondent shal...

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

Sections referenced in this judgment

The order — as passed by the High Court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF MARCH 2012/24TH PHALGUNA 1933 WP(C).No. 6386 of 2012 (W) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- BABY MATHEW SOMATHEERAM, CHOWARA P.O., BALARAMAPURAM THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADVS.SRI.A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR (SR.) SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR SRI.P.GOPINATH MENON SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SMT.PREETHA S.NAIR RESPONDENT(S): --------------------- 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CICLE-1(1) OFFICE OF THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX RANGE-1, AYAKAR BHAVAN,KAWDIAR THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 003. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KAWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 003. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.K.C. VINCENT BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX svs THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14-03-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.6386/2012 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1:COPY OF THE ORDER OF ASSESSMENT MADE UNDER SECTION 143(3)OF THE ACT DATED 20/12/2009 ALONG WITH INCOME TAX COMPUTATION FORM AND NOTICE OF DEMAND PASSED BY THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1)THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.OF THE ACT DATED 20/12/2009 ALONG WITH INCOME TAX COMPUTATION FORM AND NOTICE OF DEMAND PASSED BY THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1)THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. P2:COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX (APPEALS), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 18/1/2011.INCOMETAX (APPEALS), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 18/1/2011. P3:COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR STAY FILED BEFORE THE ASSESSING AUTHORITY NAMELY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 25/1/2011.AUTHORITY NAMELY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 25/1/2011. P4:COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR STAY DATED 17/2/2011 FILED BEFORE THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY NAMELY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.BEFORE THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY NAMELY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. P5:COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 3/11/2011 ISSUED BY THE ASSESSING AUTHORITY NAMELY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ svs P.A. TO JUDGE. ================== Against Ext.P1 assessment order, the petitioner has filed Ext.P2appeal along with Ext.P4 stay petition. The petitioner's grievance isthat during the pendency of the stay petition, coercive recoveryproceedings have been initiated by the assessing authority forrecovery of the disputed amount. 2.I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. 3.I am satisfied that before the appellate authority couldconsider and pass orders on Ext.P4 stay petition, it is unjust to initiatecoercive recovery proceedings for recovery of the amount disputed.Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with the followingdirections: The 2[nd] respondent shall consider and pass orders on Ext.P4 staypetition, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one monthfrom the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. Till ordersare passed on Ext.P4, coercive recovery proceedings for recovery ofthe disputed amount in Ext.P2 shall be kept in abeyance. sdk+ Sd/- S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// 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.
✅ 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