K. KUTHUBUDHEEN v. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,
Court: High Court of Kerala
Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Kerala judgment dated 2020-01-13. K. KUTHUBUDHEEN v. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS MONDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JANUARY 2020 / 23RD POUSHA, 1941 WP(C). No. 626 OF 2020(C) PETITIONER: K. KUTHUBUDHEEN AGED 70 YEARS KALODI HOUSE, PARAMMAL, CHERUSHOLA P. O. , MALAPPURAM - 676 510. BY ADVS. SRI. HARISANKAR V. MENON SMT. MEERA V. MENON SMT. K. KRISHNA RESPONDENTS: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1 AND TPS, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, TIRUR - 676101. 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, KOZHIKODE - 673 001. OTHER PRESENT: SRI. CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, STANDING COUNSEL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13. 01. 2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC No. 626 of 2020 ALEXANDER THOMAS, J. ========================= WP(C). NO.
626 of 2020 ========================= th Dated this the 13 day of January, 2020 J U D G M E N T The prayers in the above Writ Petition (Civil) are as follows: nd “ i) To direct the 2 respondent to dispose of Ext. P2 appeal and Ext. P3 stay petition expeditiously by the issue of a writ of mandamus or such other writ or order or direction. ii) To grant the petitioner such other incidental reliefs including the costs of these proceedings. ” 2. Heard Sri. Harisankar. V. Menon, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. Christopher Abraham, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Income Tax Department, Government of India, appearing for the respondents. 3. Being aggrieved by impugned Ext. P1 order, the nd petitioner has filed Ext. P2 appeal before the 2 respondent without delay and has also filed Ext. P3 stay application in Ext. P2 appeal seeking stay of the enforcement of the impugned Ext. P1 order. WPC No. 626 of 2020 4.
Taking note of the facts and circumstances of this case, nd it is ordered in the interest of justice that the 2 respondent Appellate authority will take up for consideration the plea made by the petitioner, as per Ext p3 stay application and after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the petitioner through authorized representative/counsel if any, will pass considered orders thereon without much delay, preferably within a period of 2 months from the date of production of a certified nd copy of this judgment. Until orders are passed by the 2 respondent on Ext. P3 stay application, further steps for enforcement of impugned Ext. P1 order shall be kept in abeyance by the respondents concerned. With these observations and directions, the above Writ Petition (Civil) stands finally disposed of. (Sd/-) ALEXANDER THOMAS JUDGE LU WPC No. 626 of 2020 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2017-18.
EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR 2017-18. EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. // True Copy // PA To Judge
Source: High Court of Kerala. Archive: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.