Wp(C)/8758/2024 Of Chandran Sarath v. Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax/ Income Tax Officer
High Court
20 Mar 2024 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Wp(C)/8758/2024 Of Chandran Sarath v. Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax/ Income Tax Officer
Date of order
20 Mar 2024
Assessment year(s)
2015-2016
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Wp(C)/8758/2024 Of Chandran Sarath v. Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax/ Income Tax Officer, the High Court (2024) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Decision: Thus, the writ petition is dismissed, leaving it opento the petitioner to avail the statutory remedy of 2[nd]appeal, if he is so advised.
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 ERNAKULAMPRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGHWEDNESDAY, THE 20 DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 30TH PHALGUNA, 1945WP(C) NO. 8758 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
CHANDRAN SARATH,AGED 40 YEARSSINDHU SADANAM, THUVAYOOR NORTH, MANAKKALA, ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA, KERALA, PIN - 691551BY ADVS.ANIL D. NAIR (SR.)TELMA RAJUADITYA UNNIKRISHNAN
RESPONDENTS:
NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE (NFAC), NEW DELHI,
SRI. P.G. JAYSHANKAR-SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
20.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 20[th] day of March, 2024
The petitioner is an assessee under the provisions ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961, and the Rules madethereunder. The petitioner is engaged in the business ofbuying and selling of cashew, in the name and style ofSree Bhadra Cashew Company. The assessment for theassessment year 2015-16 was completed under Section147 read with Sections 144 and 144 B of the Income TaxAct, 1961, on 22.03.2022. As per the assessment order,the gross income, which escaped assessment wasRs.2,08,64,696/-, on which tax and penalty etc., has beendemanded.
2. Aggrieved by the said assessment order, thepetitioner has filed Ext.P2 appeal before the 2[nd]respondent. The appeal has been dismissed vide Ext.P3order. There is a remedy of filing 2[nd] appeal before theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, against the saidimpugned order.
AP
3. This Court finds no ground to entertain this writpetition inasmuch as there is equally efficacious remedyavailable to the petitioner of filing the 2[nd] appeal beforethe Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.
Thus, the writ petition is dismissed, leaving it opento the petitioner to avail the statutory remedy of 2[nd]appeal, if he is so advised.
Sd/-
DINESH KUMAR SINGH
JUDGE
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 8758/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITSExhibit P1
Exhibit P1TRUE COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED22.3.2022 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015-2016Exhibit P2TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM IN FORMNO.35 ALONG WITH STATEMENT OF FACTS ANDGROUNDS OF APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE 2NDRESPONDENT
Exhibit P3TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 28.12.2023ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENTExhibit P4TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 20.12.2023 ISSUEDBY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
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.