KURIAN JOSEPH vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER
What did the High Court hold?
The provided text is a procedural order admitting the writ petition for hearing. It does not contain any findings or decisions on the merits of the case, nor does it detail any reasoning or ratio decidendi. Consequently, there are no operative directions or issues left undecided that can be reported.
What were the facts?
The petitioner, Kurian Joseph, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala challenging an order. The respondents are the Income Tax Officer, Ward II, Kottayam, and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) V, Kochi. The specific assessment year(s) and the nature of the order or action under challenge are not explicitly stated in the provided text. The procedural history leading to this writ petition is also not detailed. The amount in dispute, if any, is not mentioned.
What were the issues?
The provided text does not contain sufficient information to identify the specific issues the Tribunal had to decide, nor does it record the arguments made by the assessee or the revenue. Therefore, no questions of law or mixed law and fact can be framed, and no contentions or reliance on authorities can be listed.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL 2014/11TH CHAITHRA, 1936 WP(C).No. 9418 of 2014 (B) --------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- KURIAN JOSEPH, THEKKEL HOUSE, MANNARAKAYAM P.O., KANJIRAPPALLY, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.RAMESH CHERIAN JOHN RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD II, OFFICE OF THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOTTAYAM RANGE, PUBLIC LIBRARY BUILDING, SASTHRY ROAD, KOTTAYAM - 686 001. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) V, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)-V, KERA BHAVAN, NEAR S.R.V.SCHOOL, KOCHI-695 001. R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, INCOME TAX THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01-04-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss
WP(C).No. 9418 of 2014 (B) ------------------------------------------ APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS: --------------------------------------- EXT.P1 - TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 31-01-2014 PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE ACT ALONG WITH NOTICE OF DEMAND. EXT.P2 - TRUE COPY OF THE FORM OF APPEAL AND GROUNDS OF APPEAL DATED 22-02-2014 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-V,COCHIN. EXT.P3 - TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FOR STAY OF COLLECTION DATED 25-02-2014. EXT.P4 - TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 25-02-2014 FOR STAY OF COLLECTION OF DEMAND FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER., EXT.P5 - TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 17-03-2014 FILED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P6 - TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 18-03-2014. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: ----------------------------------------- N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C) No. 9418 of 2014 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 1st day of April, 2014 JUDGMENT Being aggrieved of Ext. P1 assessment order passed by the first respondent in respect of the assessment year 2011 - '12, the petitioner has preferred Ext. P2 appeal along with Ext. P3 petition for stay, which are pending consideration before the second respondent. The grievance of the petitioner is that without any regard to the pendency of the above proceedings, the respondents are proceeding with coercive steps, which hence are sought to be intercepted by this Court. 2. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 3. Considering the facts and circumstances, the second respondent is directed to pass appropriate orders on Ext. P3 petition for stay, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Coercive proceedings stated as being pursued against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance till such time.
W.P.(C) No. 9418 of 2014 : 2 : Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with copy of the writ petition before the second respondent for further steps. The Writ Petition is disposed of. Sd/- P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, (JUDGE) kmd
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Sri Sai Poornima Microns vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner(St)Andhra Pradesh · 2 Nov 2026
- Pollisetti Venkata Ramakrishna vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 2 Nov 2026
- M/S Ayyappa Enterprises vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State TaxAndhra Pradesh · 2 Nov 2026
- Commissioner Of Customs(Airport And General), New Delhi vs. M/S Mauli Worldwide LogisticsDelhi · 2 Nov 2026
- Padu Paraja vs. The Comnr. Of CT. And GST, OdishaOrissa · 2 Nov 2026