KANCOR INGREDIENTS LIMITED vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP(C)/25400/2013HC KeralaKLHC01068588201318 October 2013Author: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH4 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The provided text is an excerpt from the cause list of a writ petition and does not contain the judgment of the High Court. Therefore, it is not possible to determine what the High Court decided, the reasoning behind its decision, or the operative directions issued. The judgment is silent on the findings for any issues, the ratio decidendi, and any specific relief granted or denied.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Kancor Ingredients Limited, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala challenging an order passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(2), Kochi. The petitioner is represented by its Financial Controller. The respondents are the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Ernakulam. The writ petition was filed seeking appropriate directions or orders from the High Court. 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.

What were the issues?

The provided text does not contain the specific questions of law or fact that the High Court had to decide, nor does it record the arguments presented by the petitioner (assessee) or the respondent (revenue). Therefore, it is not possible to identify the issues, the provisions of the Income Tax Act they turn on, or the authorities, circulars, or precedents relied upon by either side. The judgment is silent on these aspects.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH FRIDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2013/26TH ASWINA, 1935 WP(C).No. 25400 of 2013 (Y) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- KANCOR INGREDIENTS LIMITED, KANAKKANKADAVU ROAD, ANGAMALY SOUTH -683573 REPRESENTED BY ITS FINANCIAL CONTROLLER, MR. RAHUL J. LALKA

BY ADVS.SRI.JOSEPH MARKOS(SR.) SRI.V.ABRAHAM MARKOS SRI.BINU MATHEW SRI.TOM THOMAS (KAKKUZHIYIL) SRI.ABRAHAM JOSEPH MARKOS SRI.ABRAHAM VARGHESE THARAKAN RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -1(2) , KOCHI-682018 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) ERNAKULAM -682018

R BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18-10- 2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No. 25400 of 2013 (Y) APPENDIX PETITIONERS EXHIBITS EXT.P1 COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 28-3-2013 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 EXT.P2 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 29-12-2011 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 EXT.P3 COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 22-12-2010 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 EXT.P4 COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 12-4-2013 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT AGAINST EXT.P1 ASSESSMENT ORDER EXT.P5 COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 30-1-2012 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT AGAINST EXT.P2 ASSESSMENT ORDER EXT.P6 COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 24-1-2011 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT AGAINST EXT.P3 ASSESSMENT ORDER EXT.P7 COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 12-4-2013 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE the 2ND RESPONDENT ALONG WITH EXT.P4 APPEAL EXT.P8 COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 21-3-2012 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE the 2ND RESPONDENT EXT.P9 COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 9-10-2013 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE the 2ND RESPONDENT RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS NIL TRUE COPY P.A TO JUDGE SMM

V.CHITAMBARESH,J. = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C) No.25400 of 2013 = = = = = = = = = = = == = = = = Dated this the 18th day of October, 2013

J U D G M E N T The petitioner has filed Exts.P4,P5 and P6 appeals against Exts.P1,P2 and P3 orders of assessment. The appeals are accompanied by Ext.P7,P8 and P9 petitions for stay of recovery of the disputed tax. The petitioner is apprehensive of coercive steps even before the disposal of the appeals and the petitions for stay. 2. I direct the second respondent to consider Exts.P7,P8 and P9 petitions with notice to the petitioner within a period of one month. The coercive steps pursuant to Exts.P1,P2 and P3 orders shall be put on hold in the meanwhile. 3. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petition with the judgment before the second respondent for compliance. The writ petition is disposed of. V.CHITAMBARESH JUDGE smm

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →