M/S.Orchid Marine vs Income Tax Officer on 5 April, 2011

[Cites 0, Cited by 2]

Kerala High Court

M/S.Orchid Marine vs Income Tax Officer on 5 April, 2011

Bench: C.K.Abdul Rehim

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 10619 of 2011(B)


1. M/S.ORCHID MARINE, ANWAR PALACE,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

                For Petitioner  :SRI.A.KRISHNAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.K.ABDUL REHIM

 Dated :05/04/2011

 O R D E R
                        C.K.ABDUL REHIM,J.
                    -------------------------------
                    WP(C).NO. 10619 of 2011
                   ---------------------------------
             Dated this the 5th day of April, 2011

                            JUDGMENT

Against Ext.P1 order of assessment, the petitioner had filed appeal before the 2nd respondent, as evidenced from Ext.P3. Along with the appeal the petitioner had filed stay petition as evidenced from Ext.P4. It is submitted that the appeal as well as the stay petition are pending consideration and disposal before the 2nd respondent. Grievance of the petitioner is that, without considering pendency of the appeal, coercive steps of recovery has now been initiated on the basis of Ext.P2 notice issued.

2. Heard; learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents. Considering pendency of the statutory appeal, I am of the opinion that the writ petition can be disposed of directing that authority to expedite the matter.

3. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P4 stay petition filed along with the appeal, after affording an opportunity WP(C).10619/2011 2 of hearing to the petitioner, as early as possible, at any rate within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment .

4. Till such time orders are passed by the 2nd respondent as directed above, recovery of the amounts covered under Ext.P1, which is now initiated on the basis of Ext.P2 notice, shall be kept in abeyance.

5. The petitioner will produce a copy of this judgment before the 2nd respondent.

6. Needless to say that the 2nd respondent will take all earnest steps for disposal of the appeal at the earliest possible.





                                 C.K.ABDUL REHIM,JUDGE
pmn/

WP(C).10619/2011    3

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Kerala High Court