Sree Narayana Educational And Cultural ... vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax on 5 March, 2019

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Sree Narayana Educational And Cultural ... vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax on 5 March, 2019

Bench: Dama Seshadri Naidu

                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                      PRESENT

                 THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU

            TUESDAY ,THE 05TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 14TH PHALGUNA, 1940

                               WP(C).No. 6516 of 2019



PETITIONER/S:


                SREE NARAYANA EDUCATIONAL AND CULTURAL TRUST
                XVI/256, CHENTHRAPPINI, THRISSUR 680 687
                REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY MR.C.V SUBASH.

                BY ADVS.
                SRI.A.KUMAR
                SMTG.MINI(1748)
                SRI.AJAY V.ANAND
                SRI.P.J.ANILKUMAR
                SRI.P.S.SREE PRASAD




RESPONDENT/S:
       1        ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
                EXEMPTION CIRCLE, KOCHI 682 018.

        2       THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)
                POORNIMA BUILDINGS, MANORAMA JUNCTION
                PANAMPILLY NAGAR, KOCHI 682 036.


                SC SRI. CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM


THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.03.2019, THE COURT ON
THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No. 6516 of 2019                  2




                                 JUDGMENT

The petitioner, a registered dealer under the Income Tax Act on the rolls of the 1st respondent, questioned the Ext.P1 assessment order, before the 2 nd respondent. The petitioner has also filed a stay petition in the appeal. Ventilating its grievance that the authorities are taking coercive steps before the appellate authority could consider the stay petition, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.

3. I reckon the petitioner has exercised on time its statutory remedy of filing an appeal. It appears that it has also filed a stay petition. Procedural fairness demands that the authorities may wait, before taking further steps, until the appellate authority decides on the stay petition.

Therefore, I dispose of the writ petition directing the respondent authority to defer coercive steps until the 2 nd respondent considers the stay petition. I also hope that the 2nd respondent will dispose of the stay petition expeditiously.

Sd/-

DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU JUDGE WP(C).No. 6516 of 2019 3 sd APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF ASSESSMENT DATED 19-12- 2018 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 27-02- 2019.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR STAY DATED 04-03- 2019.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 20-02-2019. sd

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Kerala High Court