Writ appeals against an order quashing income tax proceedings were dismissed as infructuous because the underlying appeals challenging subsequent assessment orders had already been set aside.
The writ appeals were dismissed as infructuous.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 11.06.2018
Coram
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.M.SUNDRESH and The Hon'ble Mr. Justice N.ANAND VENKATESH
W.A.Nos.728 and 729 of 2010
M/s.Ponds India Ltd.,
(since amalgamated with Hindustan Level Ltd., and presently known as Hindustan Unilever Limited) 101, Santhome High Road, Chennai - 28. .. Appellant in both the W.As Vs 1.The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle V(2), Aayakar Bhavan, 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai - 34.
2.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle V(2), Aayakar Bhavan, 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai - 34. 3.The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai III, Company Circle V(2), Aayakar Bhavan, 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai - 34. .. Respondents in both W.As
Appeals preferred under Clause XV of Letters Patent against the order dated 06.11.2009 made in W.P.Nos.2195 and 2196 of 2005.
Prayer in WP.No.2195 & 2196/2005:To call for the records and quash the proceedings in No. 52061P/A.C.Coy.Cir.V(2) dated 19th March 2004 read with proceedings No. PANAAACP3642C/DC-V(2)/19971998 and 1998-1999 dated 23rd December 2004 pertaining to the Assessment Year 1997-98 and 1998-99 on the file of the 1st and 2nd respondents herein.
For Appellant .. Mr.N.Muthukumar in both W.As
For Respondents.. Ms.Hema Muralikrishnan
in both W.As
COMMON JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by M.M.SUNDRESH, J.)
These writ appeals are directed against the order dated 06.11.2009 made in W.P.Nos.2195 and 2196 of 2005.
2.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
3.When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel appearing for the appellant would submit that in view of the subsequent development, nothing survives for adjudication in these writ appeals. He has also produced a copy of the order passed in W.P.Nos.15164 and 15165 of 2010 dated 19.07.2010 by which subsequent assessment orders were also challenged and set aside.
4.In such view of the matter, these writ appeals are dismissed as infructuous. No costs. Sd/-Assistant Registrar(CS V) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle V(2), Aayakar Bhavan, 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai - 34.
2.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle V(2), Aayakar Bhavan, 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai - 34. 3.The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai III, Company Circle V(2), Aayakar Bhavan, 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai - 34. +1cc to M/s.N.Muthukumar, Advocate SR.No.36519 +1cc to M/s.Hema Murali Krishnan, Advocate SR.No.36771 sm:22.6.2018 W.A.Nos.728 and 729 of 2010
M/s. Ponds India Ltd.
The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle V(2), Chennai
The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle V(2), Chennai
The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai III
M.M.Sundresh
N.Anand Venkatesh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
