Ahammed Parammal vs. Commercial Tax Officer
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
JUDGMENT The petitioner, impugning Ext.P1 assessment order under the KVAT Act, filed an appeal before the 2nd respondent, who rejected it. Then the petitioner filed a 2nd appeal before the 3rd respondent. The petitioner also filed Ext.P4 stay application.
In view of the above, there shall be a direction to the 3rd respondent to take a decision on Ext.P4 stay application within two months. Till then, recovery proceedings pursuant to the impugned order in the appeal shall be kept in abeyance. The Writ Petition is disposed as above. A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE PR/19.07.2019 JUDGE
WP(C).No.19891 of 2019 ..4.. APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 25.9.2017 FOR THE YEAR 2016-17 PASSED BY 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2OF THE ORDER DATED 31.1.2018 PASSED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3OF TRIBUNAL APPEAL MEMORANDUM SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 15.7.2019 FILED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4OF STAY PETITION DATED 15.7.2019 FILED BY PETITIONER BEFORE THE THIRD RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P5OF DEMAND NOTICE AS PER RRC NO. 2018/3796/10 DATED 18.9.2018 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT ALONG WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS.
Reproduced from the public record of the Kerala High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.