IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 1ST SEPTEMBER 2008 / 10TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 26266 of 2008(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ USHA SCHOOL OF ATHLETICS KOYILANDY KOZHIKODE DISTRICT REP.BY P.A.AJANACHANDRAN SECRETARY BY ADV. SRI.ARIKKAT VIJAYAN MENON SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON SMT.MEERA V.MENON SRI.MAHESH V.MENON RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD NO.2(1) `KOZHIKODE 2. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX KOZHIKODE 3. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS-I) KOZHIKODE BY SRI.GEORGE K.GEORGE, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M. JOSEPH, J. ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 26266 OF 2008 B ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 1st day of September, 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is a charitable trust engaged in the promotion of sports. Petitioner is assessed to tax by Ext.P2. Admittedly, this is done on the basis of the amount which received by the petitioner in a total sum of Rs.11 lakhs remained unutilized. According to the petitioner,on account of certain circumstances it could not be utilized during the year in question. The petitioner had already moved Ext.P3 application before the assessing authority and also filed Ext.P4 petition for condonation of delay. Petitioner seeks to quash Ext.P6 order. By Ext.P6 order, the assessing authority refused to stay of recovery but permitted payment of the amount due in instalments. Recovery steps are directed to be taken on default in payment. 2. I heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents. WPC.26266/08 : 2 : Having regard to the facts of this case, writ petition is disposed of as follows. There will be a direction to the 2nd respondent to pass orders on Ext.P4 application in accordance with law within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is further ordered that if the delay is condoned and if the petitioner files a stay petition in Ext.P3 appeal before the 3rd respondent, the 3rd respondent will take a decision thereon in accordance with law, within three weeks from the date of passing of the order in Ext.P4 by the 2nd respondent. Till orders are passed as aforesaid, there will be no further proceedings against the petitioner on the basis of Ext.P1 assessment order. Sd/- (K.M.JOSEPH, JUDGE) aks /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE