Case LawHigh Court › Wp(C)/8790/2022 Of M/S J & J Associates...

Wp(C)/8790/2022 Of M/S J & J Associates v. The Income Tax Officer

High Court 28 Sep 2022 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Wp(C)/8790/2022 Of M/S J & J Associates v. The Income Tax Officer
Date of order
28 Sep 2022
Assessment year(s)
2012-13
Outcome
Other

Case summary

In Wp(C)/8790/2022 Of M/S J & J Associates v. The Income Tax Officer, the High Court (2022) decided the matter.

Decision: 8790 OF 2022 3 from the managing partner of the petitioner firm to the accountof the firm, subject to compliance with all procedural formalities.Proceedings, if any, initiated against the petitioner for recoveryof amounts due under Ext.P1 order of assessment shall be keptin abeyance for a period of...

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 GOPINATH P. WEDNESDAY, THE 28 DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022 / 6TH ASWINA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 8790 OF 2022 PETITIONER/S: M/S J & J ASSOCIATES, VANACHIRAKKAL HOUSE, THENGODE P.O., ERNAKULAM-682 021, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER. BY ADV M.S.AMAL DHARSAN RESPONDENT/S: 1THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD 2(1), KOCHI-682 016.WARD 2(1), KOCHI-682 016. 2THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXXX 3THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(2), KOCHI-682 016.CIRCLE 2(2), KOCHI-682 016. BY ADV CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON28.09.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 8790 OF 2022 2 JUDGMENT Petitioner is aggrieved by the fact that certain TDSdeducted in the name of the managing partner of the petitionerfirm has not been given credit to in the name of the firm. It issubmitted that initially, some of the works undertaken by thepetitioner firm were executed in the name of the managingpartner Mr.V.K. Viju and while making payments, theGovernment department, for which the work was done, haddeducted tax and paid it to the credit of the managing partner. 2. When this matter is taken up for consideration today, thelearned Standing Counsel for the department points out theprovisions of Rule 37BA of the Income Tax Rules and states thaton the procedure contemplated therein in sub-rule (2) of Rule37BA being complied with, the credit can be transferred. Hesubmits that on a request being made, a link can be provided forenabling compliance with the procedure contemplated by sub-rule(2) of Rule 37BA of the Income Tax Rules. 3. Taking note of the above submission, this writ petition will stand disposed of directing that on a proper applicationbeing made, the Income Tax department will provide a link foruploading the documents necessary for transfer of credit of TDS WP(C) NO. 8790 OF 2022 3 from the managing partner of the petitioner firm to the accountof the firm, subject to compliance with all procedural formalities.Proceedings, if any, initiated against the petitioner for recoveryof amounts due under Ext.P1 order of assessment shall be keptin abeyance for a period of two months to enable the petitionerto avail the option under Rule 37BA(2) of the Income Tax Rules.The writ petition is disposed of as above ajt sd/-GOPINATH P.JUDGE WP(C) NO. 8790 OF 2022 4 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 8790/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 14.02.20134 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13.Exhibit P2TRUE COPY OF THE RECTIFICATION APPLICATION DATED 10.06.2014 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. Exhibit P3TRUE COPY OF THE REMINDER LETTER DATED 28.,02.2022 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.Exhibit P4TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 01.11.2021 IN WPC NO.2442/2019.Exhibit P5TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 02.03.2022 IN WPC NO.6806/2022.
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