LAKESHORE HOSPITAL AND RESEARCH CENTRE LTD. V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), KOCHI (2)

WP(C)/18510/2023

AI Insights

The case involves Lakeshore Hospital and Research Centre Ltd., the petitioner, who filed a writ petition against the Income Tax Officer (TDS), Kochi, and other income tax authorities, challenging the enforcement of an assessment order. The petitioner had filed an appeal and a stay petition against the assessment order but contended that the respondents were proceeding to enforce the order despite the pending petitions. The court's intervention was sought to defer the enforcement of the assessment order until the stay petition was considered. The court found merit in the petitioner's request and directed the second respondent to expedite the consideration of the stay petition.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 748828 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 07-06-2023
• Assessment Year: misc
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM
• Assessee Lawyers: ABRAHAM MARKOS; V ABRAHAM MARKOS; ISAAC ALEXANDER; JOSEPH SHARAD; JOSEPH KODANTHARA
• Keywords: Appeal; Assessment Order; Income Tax; Stay Petition

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS WEDNESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 17TH JYAISHTA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 18510 OF 2023 PETITIONER: LAKESHORE HOSPITAL AND RESEARCH CENTRE LTD. AGED 72 YEARS XVI/612 NH47 BYPASS, P.O NETTOOR, ERNAKULAM, KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR S.K. ABDULLA., PIN – 682040 BY ADVS. ABRAHAM JOSEPH MARKOS V.ABRAHAM MARKOS ISAAC THOMAS ALEXANDER JOSEPH MARKOS SHARAD JOSEPH KODANTHARA RESPONDENTS: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), KOCHI (2) CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING I.S. PRESS ROAD, KOCHI, PIN – 682018 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL SCHEME, NEW DELHI., PIN – 110001 3 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CORPORATE CIR 1(1), KOCHI CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING I.S. PRESS ROAD, KOCHI., PIN – 682018 SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.06.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C)No.18510/2023 -:2:- Dated this the 7th day of June,2023 J U D G M E N T The writ petition is filed to direct the second respondent to consider and dispose of Ext P2 appeal and Ext P3 stay petition, expeditiously and until such time, to defer all further proceedings pursuant to Ext P1 assessment order. 2. The petitioner’s case is that, aggrieved by Ext P1 assessment order, the petitioner has preferred Ext P2 appeal and Ext P3 stay petition before the second respondent on 28.04.2023. Notwithstanding the filing of Exts P2 & P3, the respondents are threatening to enforce Ext P1 order through Ext P5 letter. Hence, the writ petition. 3. Heard; Sri. Abraham Joseph Markos, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and W.P.(C)No.18510/2023 -:3:- Sri.Christopher Abraham, the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents. 4. Having considered the pleadings and materials on record and taking note of the fact that Ext P3 stay petition is pending consideration before the second respondent since 28.04.2023, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition in the following manner: (i) The second respondent is directed to consider and dispose of Ext P3 stay petition, in accordance with law and as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment, after affording the petitioner an opportunity of being heard. (ii) Needless to mention that, if the second respondent proposes to pass a conditional order of stay, he shall state reasons for the same. W.P.(C)No.18510/2023 -:4:- (iii) Until such time orders are passed on Ext P3 stay petition, all further proceedings pursuant to Exts P1 & P5 shall stand deferred. Sd/- C.S.DIAS,JUDGE DST/07.06.23 //True copy// P .A.To Judge W.P.(C)No.18510/2023 -:5:- APPENDIX PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 30.03.2023 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 28.04.2023 FILED AGAINST EXHIBIT P1 ORDER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P3 STAY PETITION DATED 28.04.2023 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 15.05.2023 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 17.05.2023 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT RESPONDENT’S EXHIBITS: NIL "