PANDARATHIPARMBU MOHAMMED ASHRAF vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP(C)/31005/2013HC KeralaKLHC01074189201320 December 2013Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON3 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The provided text is the initial filing of a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala and does not contain any decision, reasoning, or operative directions from a Tribunal or any judicial authority. Therefore, there is no finding on any issue, no reasoning provided, and no ratio decidendi that can be extracted. The judgment does not record any decision on the merits of the case, nor does it mention any specific relief granted or denied.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Pandarathiparmbu Mohammed Ashraf, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The petition challenges an action or order by the respondents, the Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru, and the Income Tax Commissioner, Ernakulam. 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. The amount in dispute, if any, is not mentioned. The case is presented as a writ petition (civil) filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

What were the issues?

The provided text is a writ petition filed before the High Court of Kerala and does not contain the issues that the Tribunal had to decide, nor the arguments presented by the assessee and the revenue. Therefore, the questions for decision, the specific provisions of the Income Tax Act involved, and the contentions of the parties, including any reliance on authorities, circulars, or precedents, are not recorded in this 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 20TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2013/29TH AGRAHAYANA, 1935 WP(C).No. 31005 of 2013 (A) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- PANDARATHIPARMBU MOHAMMED ASHRAF, HOUSE NO.IX/485, EDACHIRA, THENGODU POST, KAKKANADU, PIN 682 021. BY ADVS.SRI.BABU CHERUKARA SMT.ROSAMMA MATHEW SRI.K.K.ALIAS SRI.P.A.SALIM SRI.ANZAR BASHEER SRI.P.ANTO THOMAS SRI.K.S.GIREESAN RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, C.P.C. POST BAG NO.1, ELECTRONIC CITY POST OFFICE,BANGALURU, PIN 560 100. 2. INCOME TAX COMMISSIONER, INCOME TAX COMMISSIONERATE, I.S.PRESS ROAD ERNAKULAM, COCHIN-18. R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, INCOME TAX THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20-12-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss

WP(C).No. 31005 of 2013 (A) ------------------------------------------ APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBIT: ---------------------------------------- EXT.P1 - TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR REFUND UNDER FORM ITR-V DATED 17-7-2013. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: ------------------------------------------ N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ======================== W.P.(C). No. 31005 of 2013 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of December, 2013 JUDGMENT The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, some amount is due from the respondent department to the petitioner and seeking for refund vide Ext.P1 application before the first respondent. The prayer is only to cause the same to be considered and finalized within a reasonable time. 2. Heard the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 3. After hearing both the sides, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the first respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P1 application in accordance with law after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, at the earliest, at any rate, within 'two months' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is made clear that, this Court has not expressed anything with regard to the merits involved or as to the eligibility of the petitioner to have the amount disbursed, which is to be considered by the first respondent. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the first respondent for further steps. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. kp/-

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →