M/S. CANON GRANITES PVT. LTD vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF MARCH 2018 / 30TH PHALGUNA, 1939 WP(C).No. 9719 of 2018 PETITIONER: M/S.CANON GRANITES PVT. LTD., MUNICIPAL BUILDING, ROUND SOUTH, THRISSUR-680 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, MR.JOSE K.FRANCIS. BY ADV.SRI.RAMESH CHERIAN JOHN RESPONDENT(S): 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), AAYAKKAR BHAVAN, SHAKTHAN THAPURAN NAGAR, THRISSUR - 680 001. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), O/O OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), AAYAKKAR BHAVAN, SHAKTHAN THAPURAN NAGAR, THRISSUR - 680 001. R1 & R2 BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21-03-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts 24/3/2018

WP(C).No. 9719 of 2018 (L) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS EXHIBIT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF ASSESSMENT DATED 30.3.2016 PASSED U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT FOR /Y 2013-14. EXHIBIT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE FORM OF APPEAL, STATEMENT OF FACTS AND GROUNDS OF APPEAL EXHIBIT.P2(A) TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RECEIPT OF THE APPEAL IN THE OFFICE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT.P3 TRUE COPY OF PETITION DATED 29.4.2016 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT.P3(A) TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RECEIPT OF THE STAY APPLICATION IN THE OFFICE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT.P4 TRUE COPY OF COMMON NOTICE ISSUED FOR THE A/Y 2013-14 AND 2014-15 (STATE AS 2013 & 2014) RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE sts 24/3/2018

P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J. --------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 9719 of 2018 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of March, 2018

JUDGMENT Petitioner is an assessee under the Income Tax Act (the Act) on the rolls of the first respondent. Aggrieved by Ext.P1 assessment order, the petitioner preferred Ext.P2 appeal before the second respondent. Ext.P3 is the application for stay preferred by the petitioner in Ext.P2 appeal. The grievance of the petitioner in the writ petition concerns the delay on the part of the second respondent in passing orders on Ext.P3 application for stay. It is alleged by the petitioner in the writ petition that proceedings have already been initiated for realisation of the amounts covered by Ext.P1 order. The petitioner, therefore, seeks appropriate directions in this regard, in this writ petition. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as

WPC 9719/18 -:2:- also the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the second respondent to take a decision on Ext.P3 application for stay, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say that until orders are passed on Ext.P3 application for stay, further proceedings for realisation of the amounts covered by Ext.P1 assessment order shall be deferred. Sd/- P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE vps 23/3 /True Copy/ PS to Judge