Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Advocates
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Advocates
Judges

    Honey Rahulan v. Income Tax

    JUDGMENT

    The petitioner has filed Exts.P3 and P5 appeals against Exts.P1 and P2 orders of assessment. The appeals are accompanied by petitions for condonation of delay and Exts. P4 and P6 petitions for stay. The petitioner is aggrieved by the coercive steps proposed in Ext.P7 order even before the disposal of the appeal and the petitions aforestated.

    2. I direct the second respondent to consider the petitions for condonation of delay and Exts.P4 and P6 petitions with notice to the petitioner within a period of two months. The coercive steps proposed in Ext.P7 order shall be put on hold till orders are passed on the petitions aforestated. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the Writ Petition with the judgment before the second respondent for compliance.

    The Writ Petition is disposed of.

    Use AI to get other relevant cases.

    Comments

    Honey Rahulan v. Income Tax
    (Aug 19, 2013)