"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JULY 2012/29TH ASHADHA 1934 WP(C).No. 15840 of 2012 (D) --------------------------- PETITIONER: ----------- DR.R.PADMAKUMAR, NO.12, ANSAL RIVER DALE, EROOR, THRIPUNITHURA. BY ADVS.SRI.ANIL D. NAIR SRI.J.R.PREM NAVAZ SMT.NIVEDITA A.KAMATH RESPONDENT(S): -------------- 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRLCE, ERNAKULAM-682018. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), ERNAKULAM-682018. BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20-07-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: AS WP(C).No. 15840 of 2012 (D) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1: COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 20/12/2011 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2004-05. EXHIBIT P2: COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 20/12/2011 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2005-06. EXHIBIT P3: COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 20/12/2011 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2006-2007. EXHIBIT P4: COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 20/12/2011 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2007-2008. EXHIBIT P5: COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 20/12/2011 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2008-2009. EXHIBIT P6: COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 20/12/2011 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2009-2010. EXHIBIT P7: COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 20/12/2011 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2010-2011. EXHIBIT P8: COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2004-2005. EXHIBIT P9: COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2005-2006. EXHIBIT P10: COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2006-2007. EXHIBIT P11: COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2007-2008. EXHIBIT P12: COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2008-2009. EXHIBIT P13: COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2009-2010. EXHIBIT P14: COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2010-2011. CONT... WP(C).No. 15840 of 2012 (D) EXHIBIT P15: COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FOR THE YEAR 2004-2005 TO 2010 – 2011 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P16: COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 28/6/2012 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P17: COPY OF THE GRANISHEE PROCEEDINGS DATED 16/7/2012 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE AS P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J --------------------------------------- W.P. (C) NO. 15840 of 2012 (D) ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of July, 2012 JUDGMENT Exhibits P1 to P7 assessment orders passed by the first respondent in respect of the various assessment years 2004- 2005 to 2010-2011 have been subjected to challenge by filing Exts.P8 to P14 appeals, which are pending consideration before the second respondent. Meanwhile, the petitioner also filed a petition for stay, presumably under section 220(6) of the Income Tax Act before the concerned authority. However, after considering the same Ext.P16 communication dated 28/06/2012 was issued to the petitioner, stating that the Commissioner of Income Tax Central has rejected the stay petition. This made the petitioner to approach this Court by filing the present writ petition. 2. Heard the learned standing counsel for the respondents as well. 3. In the course of the hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has preferred a proper petition for stay before the second respondent as borne by W.P. (C) NO. 15840 of 2012 (D) 2 Ext.P18, which has been produced along with I.A.No.9912/2012. 4. After hearing both the sides, this Court finds that the various points raised by the petitioner need not be dealt with at the hands of this Court and the writ petition is disposed of, directing the second respondent to consider Ext.P18 and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law, at the earliest, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is made clear that, 'status quo' will continue till such time. The writ petition is disposed of. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE AS "