SHRI.ABRAHAM JOY vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/30291/2014HC KeralaKLHC01075910201414 November 2014Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON4 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The provided text is an order sheet for a writ petition and does not contain the judgment or decision of the High Court. Therefore, it is not possible to ascertain what the Tribunal (in this context, the High Court exercising its writ jurisdiction) decided, the reasoning behind its decision, or the operative directions issued. No findings on any issues, no ratio decidendi, and no specific relief granted are present in this excerpt. The outcome of the writ petition remains undetermined based on this information.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Shri M. Abraham Joy, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala challenging an order or action by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Kasaragod. The respondents include the Income Tax Officer, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the Tax Recovery Officer, and the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax. The specific assessment year(s) and the nature of the order or action under challenge are not explicitly detailed in the provided text. The procedural history leading to this writ petition is also not elaborated upon, beyond the fact that the matter is before the High Court for admission.

What were the issues?

The primary issue before the High Court was whether the petitioner was entitled to relief under its writ jurisdiction. The petitioner, Shri M. Abraham Joy, likely sought to challenge an adverse order or action by the Income Tax Department. The specific grounds for this challenge and the legal provisions relied upon by the petitioner are not detailed in the provided text. The respondents, represented by the Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department, would have defended the actions of the Income Tax authorities. The specific arguments presented by either side, including any reliance on case law, circulars, or specific sections of the Income Tax Act, are not recorded in the excerpt.

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 FRIDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2014/23RD KARTHIKA, 1936 WP(C).No. 30291 of 2014 (J) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- SHRI M. ABRAHAM JOY, S/O.ABRAHAM, MULAVANAL HOUSE, T.B. ROAD, KANHANGAD- 671 315, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADVS.SRI.T.M.SREEDHARAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE. SRI.V.P.NARAYANAN, SMT.DIVYA RAVINDRAN. RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, VIDYANAGAR P.O., KASARAGOD- 671 123. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, NORTH BLOCK, MANANCHIRA, KOZHIKODE- 673 001.

THE TAX RECOVERY OFFICER, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, NORTH BLOCK, MANANCHIRA, KOZHIKODE- 673 001. 4. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KANNUR RANGE, KANNUR- 670 006. BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14-11-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs.

WP(C).No. 30291 of 2014 (J) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ALONG WITH DEMAND NOTICE DATED 25-03-2014 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR AY-2011-12. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 15-10-2013 GIVEN BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 03-05-2014 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3(A) TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 03-05-2014 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE T.R. NO. 1/KGD/14-15 DATED 06-06-2014 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. AGAPJ 7988/JCIT/KNR/2014-15 DATED 13-08-2014 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs.

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C) No. 30291 of 2014 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 14th day of November, 2014 JUDGMENT Being aggrieved of Ext. P1 assessment order passed by the first respondent for the assessment year 2011 - '12, the petitioner has already preferred Ext. P3 appeal along with Ext. P3(a) interlocutory application 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 third respondent is proceeding with coercive steps, as borne by Ext. P5, which hence is sought to be intercepted.. 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(a) 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 pursuant to Ext. P4 shall be kept in abeyance till such time.

W.P.(C) No. 30291 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 →