Case LawHigh Court › Wp(C)/785/2011 Of E.mohammed Thaha v. As...

Wp(C)/785/2011 Of E.mohammed Thaha v. Asst.director Of Income Tax

High Court 10 Feb 2014 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Wp(C)/785/2011 Of E.mohammed Thaha v. Asst.director Of Income Tax
Date of order
10 Feb 2014
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Wp(C)/785/2011 Of E.mohammed Thaha v. Asst.director Of Income Tax, the High Court (2014) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.

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 P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2014/21ST MAGHA, 1935 WP(C).No. 785 of 2011 (W) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- E.MOHAMMED THAHA, CHAIRMAN, P.A.AZIZ COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY, KARAKULAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.R.KRISHNA RAJ RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (INV), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 003. 3. INCOME TAX OFFICER (CIB), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 003. 4. THE MANAGER, CANARA BANK, VAZHUTHACADU, PIN - 695 009. R1 TO R3 BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, INCOME TAX THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10-02-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. .............................................................................. W.P.(C)No.785 OF 2011 ......................................................................... Dated this the 10[th] February, 2014 J U D G M E N T The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayers: “a) Direct the respondents to return theamount of Rs.1,50,00,000/- seized from theS.B. Account No.2607101002343 of the college of the petitioner with Canara BankVazhuthacadu Branch, Thiruvananthapuramforthwith by the issue of a writ of mandamus orsuch other writ or order or direction. b) Such other relief that are prayed for during the pendency of this case including the costsof this proceedings.” 2. When the matter is taken up for consideration, the learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that after filing thewrit petition, the petitioner has approached the authorities of theIncome Tax Department by filing necessary proceedings to causethe amount of Rs.1,50,00,000/- (Rupees one crore fifty lakhsonly) seized from the account of the petitioner to be returned .Inthe said circumstance, the learned Counsel for the petitioner W.P.(C)No.785 OF 2011 2 seeks for permission to withdraw the writ petition, withoutprejudice to the rights and liberties of the petitioner to pursue thematter before the departmental authorities. Permission sought for is granted. The writ petition isdismissed as withdrawn. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENONJUDGE lk
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