Neerattiparambil Mohamed v. The Income-tax Officer Ward 1(1), Thrissur / The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Thrissur
[Citation -2020-LL-0721]
| Citation | 2020-LL-0721 |
|---|---|
| Appellant Name | Neerattiparambil Mohamed |
| Respondent Name | The Income-tax Officer Ward 1(1), Thrissur / The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Thrissur |
| Court | HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM |
| Relevant Act | Income-tax |
| Date of Order | 21/07/2020 |
| Assessment Year | 2017-18 |
| Judgment | View Judgment |
| Keyword Tags | demand notice • stay petition |
| Bot Summary: | No.14702 OF 2020(K) 2 JUDGMENT Against Ext.P1 assessment order under the Income Tax Act, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P4 appeal and Ext.P5 stay petition before the 2 nd respondent. It is the case of the petitioner that inasmuch as Exts.P5 is pending before the 2nd respondent, there ought not to have been a direction to the petitioner to pay 20 of the disputed amount even before the stay petition was considered by the appellate authority. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also Sri.Jose Joseph, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made across the Bar, I dispose the writ petition with a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P5 stay petition within four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is made clear that till such time as orders are passed by the 2 nd respondent as directed, and the orders communicated to the petitioner, recovery steps pursuant to Ext.P1 assessment order shall be kept in abeyance. Further, in view of the directions given in this judgment, Ext.P3 order of the 1st respondent shall stand quashed. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment together with a copy of the writ petition before the 2nd respondent for further action. |