M/S.N.L.PROPERTIES AND DEVELOPERS vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court held that in view of the submission by the learned counsel for the Income Tax that Ext.P1 had been withdrawn, nothing survived for consideration. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed as infructuous. The court did not delve into the merits of any substantive issue related to the assessment or recovery proceedings. No specific section of the Income Tax Act was discussed in relation to the dismissal.
What were the facts?
The petitioner, M/s. N.L. Properties and Developers, represented by its Managing Partner K.M. Nassaruddin, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The respondents were the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Ernakulam, and the Tax Recovery Officer (Non-Corporate), Kochi. The writ petition was filed challenging an order or action by the revenue. The procedural history indicates that the matter was listed for admission on February 17, 2020.
What were the issues?
The High Court had to decide whether the writ petition had any surviving issues to be considered. The revenue's counsel submitted that the document marked as Ext.P1 had been withdrawn. The assessee's contentions are not recorded in the judgment. The revenue's contention was based on the withdrawal of Ext.P1.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL MONDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 28TH MAGHA, 1941 WP(C).No.4340 OF 2020(N) PETITIONER: M/S.N.L.PROPERTIES AND DEVELOPERS PALLIKUNNEL VEETTIL, NETOOR P.O., KOCHI-682034, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, K.M.NASSARUDDIN. BY ADV. SRI.B.KRISHNA MANI RESPONDENTS: 1 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, CR BUILDING, IS PRESS ROAD, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-682018. 2 THE TAX RECOVERY OFFICER, (NON-CORPORATE). OFFICE OF THE TAX RECOVERY OFFICER, KOCHI-2, 5TH FLOOR (503), C.R.BUILDING, IS PRESS ROAD, KOCHI-682018. SRI JOSE JOSEPH SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.4340 OF 2020(N) 2 JUDGMENT The learned counsel for the Income Tax submits that the Ext.P1 has been withdrawn. In view of the aforementioned statement, nothing survives to be considered. This writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. Sd/- AMIT RAWAL nak JUDGE
WP(C).No.4340 OF 2020(N) 3 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE PROCLAMATION IN FORM NO.ITCP 13 ISSUED UNDER RULES 38 AND 52 OF SCHEDULE II. EXHIBIT P1(A) TRUE COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED DATED 30.07.2010. EXHIBIT P2(A) TRUE COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P2. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 27.01.2020. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED 03.02.2020. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 22.10.2019. EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE PROCLAMATION DATED 13.01.2016. EXHIBIT P6(A) TRUE COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P6. EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 26.06.2019. //TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Deepak Kumar Daiya vs. State Of West Bengal And Ors.Calcutta · 4 Nov 2026
- Pawan Kumar Rajgaria vs. State Of West BengalCalcutta · 4 Nov 2026
- Mohammed Fazil vs. State Of ChhattisgarhChhattisgarh · 4 Nov 2026
- Tvl. Devaerakkam Mercy Mary vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Madras · 4 Nov 2026
- Procter And Gamble Health LTD vs. Union Of INDIATelangana · 4 Nov 2026