B. SREEKANDAN AGED 60 YEARS vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court of Kerala disposed of the writ petition with specific directions. The Court directed the second respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)) to consider and pass orders on the stay petition (Ext.P3) within an outer limit of two months from the date of the order. Furthermore, the Court ordered that further proceedings pursuant to the assessment order (Ext.P1) shall be kept in abeyance until orders are passed on the stay petition. The Court did not decide on the merits of the assessment or the appeal itself, focusing solely on expediting the procedural aspect of the stay application.
What were the facts?
The petitioner, B. Sreekandan, is challenging an assessment order (Ext.P1) for the assessment year 2021-22. He has filed an appeal (Ext.P2) and a stay petition (Ext.P3) before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the second respondent. The petitioner is seeking an expeditious disposal of these pending appeals and stay petitions. The writ petition has been filed before the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam seeking directions for the speedy resolution of his case.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to an expeditious disposal of his appeal and stay petition before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)? (Question of procedure) Assessee's Contention: The petitioner seeks an order for the expeditious disposal of his appeal and stay petition. No specific legal arguments or reliance on authorities were recorded for the assessee regarding the merits of the assessment or the stay. Revenue's Contention: The learned Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department was heard. No specific arguments or reliance on authorities were recorded for the revenue regarding the merits of the assessment or the stay.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
JUDGMENT Challenging Ext.P1 assessment order for the year 2021-22, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P2 appeal and Exts.P3 stay petition, before the 2nd respondent. The petitioner seeks expeditious disposal of Exts.P2 and P3. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department.
After hearing both sides, I dispose the writ petition with the following directions: (i)The 2nd respondent shall consider and pass orders on Ext.P3 stay petition within an outer limit of two months from today. (ii)Till orders are passed as directed above, further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P1 assessment order, shall be kept in abeyance. VIJU ABRAHAM
JUDGE sm/
W.P.(C). No.8941 of 2023 : 3 : APPENDIX OF WP(C) 8941/2023 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO. ITBA/AST/S/143(3)/2022-23/1048279851(1) DATED 27-12-2022 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2021-
Exhibit P2OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2021-22 DATED 19-01-2023 Exhibit P3OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF STAY PETITION FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2021-22DATED 06-03-2023
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Abdhish Dhal Samanta, Bhubaneswar vs. Chief Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Kniit Net Industries Private Limited, Khurda vs. Superintendent Of CGST And Central Excise, Bhubaneswar Ii CircleOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Swarnapai Chemicals (Opc) Private Limited, Cuttack vs. Sales Tax Officer, Cuttack IOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S. Middlex, Puri vs. Commnr. Of State Tax, Banijyakar Bhawan, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Sunadei Indane Gramin Vitrak, Nayagarh vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, Cuttack, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
