Wp(C)/8474/2015 Of Joseph A. Mattam v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax
High Court
18 Mar 2015 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Wp(C)/8474/2015 Of Joseph A. Mattam v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax
Date of order
18 Mar 2015
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Wp(C)/8474/2015 Of Joseph A. Mattam v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax, the High Court (2015) 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 A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2015/27TH PHALGUNA, 1936
WP(C).No. 8474 of 2015 (H)
--------------------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
-----------------------
JOSEPH A. MATTAM, AGED 45 YEARS, S/O.LATE M.S.AVARTACHAN, MATTAM HOUSE, CHETTIKULAM P.O., CHALAKKUDY, THRISSUR DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.ANIL GEORGE SRI.JOBY JACOB PULICKEKUDY
RESPONDENT(S):-------------------------
1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, OFFICE OF THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-II, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, SAKTHAN THAMPURAN NAGAR, THRISSUR-680001.
2. THE TAX RECOVERY OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, SAKTHAN THAMPURAN NAGAR, THRISSUR-680001.
BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18-03-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
PJ
WP(C).No. 8474 of 2015 (H)
--------------------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS
------------------------------------
P1:COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-II, THRISSUR DATED 9/1/15THRISSUR DATED 9/1/15
P2:COPY OF THE APPELLATE ORDER AS ITA NO.20/TCR/R2IIT(A)-V/13-14 ISSUED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX APPEALSBY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX APPEALS
P3:COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM NUMBERED AS IT APPEAL NO.508C/2014 FILED BEFORE THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNALNO.508C/2014 FILED BEFORE THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
P4:COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE R2 DATED 19/1/15
P5:COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE R2 DATED 26/2/15.DATED 26/2/15.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS
--------------------------------------
NIL.
/ TRUE COPY /
P.S. TO JUDGE
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.
........................................................
.........................................................
Dated this the 18[th] day of March, 2015
J U D G M E N T
Against Ext.P2 first appellate order under the Income Tax Act,the petitioner has preferred Ext.P3 appeal before the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench. The said appeal is stated to bepending before the said forum. The petitioner is aggrieved by therecovery steps that have been initiated against the petitioner forrecovery of the amounts confirmed against the petitioner by Ext.P2first appellate order.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and thelearned Standing counsel for the respondents.
3. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of thecase as also the submissions made across the Bar, I dispose the writpetition with the following directions:
i. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CochinBench, shall consider and pass orders on Ext.P3appeal within a period of six months from thedate of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
ii. If the petitioner pays an amount ofRs.5,00,000/- in three equal successive monthlyinstalments commencing from 30.03.2015, thenfurther proceedings for recovery of theamounts confirmed against the petitionerpursuant to Ext.P2 first appellate order shall bekept in abeyance till such time as theAppellate Tribunal passes orders as directedabove and communicates the same to thepetitioner.
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
JUDGE
mns/
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.