SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2013 Supreme(Online)(KER) 42907

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
ANTONY DOMINIC, J
P S JAMEELA – Appellant
Versus
INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Challenging Exts.P1 and P2 assessment orders passed against the petitioner for the years 2005-06 and 2006-07 under the CST Act, petitioner filed Exts.P3 and P4 appeals along with stay petitions and petitions to condone delay. Appeals and other petitions are pending consideration of the 3rd respondent. In the meanwhile, on the allegation that, direction has already been issued to the Bank to freeze the bank account of the petitioner, this writ petition is filed.

2. Question of considering the appeals arises only if the delay in filing the appeals is condoned. Therefore I direct the 3rd respondent to consider the delay petition filed along with Exts.P3 and P4. Orders thereon shall be passed within four weeks from today and if delay is condoned, appeals should also be considered within two months thereafter. It is directed that in the meanwhile, recovery of the tax due under Exts.P1 and P2 will stand stayed subject to the petitioner remitting 1/3rd of the amount due W.P.(C).8595/13 thereunder and furnishing security for the balance. This shall be done before 30.3.2013. Subject to compliance as above, any coercive action including those against the petitioner's bank account, wil

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top