IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Ziyad Rahman A.A., J
Roshanara Beegam – Appellant
Versus
The Income Tax Officer Ward 2(1) – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 15006 OF 2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. recovery improper during pending appeal (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. direct appeal disposal; stay recovery (Para 3) |
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is aggrieved by the recovery proceedings that are being pursued against the petitioner, based on Ext.P1 assessment order, despite the fact that the appeal submitted by the petitioner as evidenced by Ext.P2 against Ext.P1, is even now pending consideration.
2. It is pointed out that hearing notices were issued to the petitioner, as evidenced by Exts. P3 and P5, on 06.01.2022 and 12.05.2022, and the petitioner had submitted a reply to the same. Thereafter, Ext.P7 hearing notice was issued on 15.10.2023, to which also the petitioner responded, but the appeal has not been disposed of so far.
3. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, I am of the view that, since the appeal has been pending consideration since 2020, the initiation of recovery proceedings at this juncture is not proper.
Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of, directing the 2nd respondent to dispose of Ext.P2 appeal as expeditiously as possible. It is ordered that, until the final orders are passed on the appeal, no recovery proceedings based on Ext.1 shall be initiated against the petitioner.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.