TUSHAR JAYANTHILAL JAIN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/17679/2015HC KeralaKLHC01063519201512 June 2015Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The provided text is an excerpt from a High Court writ petition and does not contain any findings or decisions by the Tribunal. It does not detail what the Tribunal decided on any issue, the reasoning behind any decision, or the ratio decidendi. Consequently, there are no operative directions or notes on any issue left undecided. The text does not contain any information to determine the holding of the Tribunal.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Tushar Jayanthilal Jain, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala challenging an order passed by the Income Tax Officer, Non-Corporate, Ward 1(2), Kochi. The petitioner also impleaded the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-III, Ernakulam, as a respondent. The specific assessment year(s) and the amount in dispute are not explicitly stated in the provided text. The procedural history leading to this writ petition is also not detailed, other than it is a challenge to an order from the Income Tax Officer.

What were the issues?

The provided text is an excerpt from a High Court writ petition and does not contain the specific issues that the Tribunal had to decide, nor the arguments presented by the assessee and the revenue. Therefore, it is not possible to identify the questions of law or mixed law and fact, the relevant provisions of the Income Tax Act, or the authorities, circulars, or precedents relied upon by either side. The judgment does not record any arguments for either the petitioner or the respondents.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE FRIDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF JUNE 2015/22ND JYAISHTA, 1937 WP(C).No. 17679 of 2015 (H) ---------------------------- PETITIONER : ---------------------- TUSHAR JAYANTHILAL JAIN, 40/6110, PUSHYARAG, GOPALAPRABHU ROAD, KOCHI -682 035 BY ADVS.SRI.ANIL D. NAIR SRI.R.SREEJITH SMT.ROSIE ATHULYA JOSEPH SMT.O.A.NURIYA RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON-CORPORATE, WARD 1 (2), KOCHI -682 018 2. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)-III, ERNAKULAM- 682 016

BY SRI.K.M.V.PANDALAI, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM,SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12-06-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts

WP(C).No. 17679 of 2015 (H) ----------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 28-03-2015 FOR THE A.Y (2012-2013) ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 28/4/15 EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION U/S. 220(6) FILED BEFORE FIRST RESPONDENT DATED 29/4/15 EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 27/5/2015 PASSED BY FIRST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 9/6/15 RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL ----------------------------------------- /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE sts

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J. ------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.17679 of 2015 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 12th day of June, 2015 J U D G M E N T The petitioner has filed Ext.P2 appeal along with Ext.P5 stay application against the assessment order passed by the 1st respondent. In the meanwhile, vide Ext.P4 order, the assessing authority directed the petitioner to remit 50% of the demand for not proceeding with recovery steps. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. Considering the fact that, the petitioner has already moved the stay application, this writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider the stay application within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after notice to the petitioner. Till disposal of the stay application, all recovery proceedings against the petitioner shall be deferred. The petitioner is also directed to produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of this writ petition before the 2nd respondent for compliance. Sd/- A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE. AV

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →