Allowed

Jayanthi Seeman v. the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-I

Madras HC7 Jul 2020WA/1748/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Division Bench dismissed the Writ Appeal and Contempt Petition. The court held that an interim stay order granted on 30.05.2019 should continue until the main statutory appeal filed before the Income Tax Appellate Authority is heard and disposed of, considering the matter was ripe for hearing.

What did the court decide?

The interim order granted on 30.05.2019 shall continue to remain in force till the appeal filed by the appellant before the 1st respondent is heard and disposed of.

Jayanthi Seeman Vs the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-I — Income Tax | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 07.07.2020

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM and THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN

¶5

W.A.No.1748 of 2019
and
CMP No.11811 of 2019
M/s.Jayanthi Seeman,
73/30, Burkit Road,
T.Nagar,
Chennai – 600 017. ..Appellant
versus
1. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-I,
Aayakar Bhavan,
121, Mahatma Gandhi Road,
Chennai – 600 034.
2. The Income Tax Officer,
Non Corp Ward.1(2),
Room No.306, III Floor,
New Block Aayakar Bhavan,
121, Mahatma Gandhi Road,
Chennai – 600 034. ..Respondents
Writ Appeal filed against the order dated 29.04.2019 in
W.P.No.10019 of 2019.

¶6

WP 10019/2019 Prayer:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the order in C.C.No.233/STAY/PCIT-1/2016-17 dated 22.03.2019 issued by the 1^st respondent and to quash the same and consequently direct the respondent no.1 to allow the stay petitions filed by the petitioner datd 11.03.2019.

¶7

For Appellant : Mrs.Aparna Nandakumar For Respondents : Mrs.Hema Muralikrishnan

¶8

Sr. Standing Counsel.

¶9

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶10

JUDGMENT

¶11

T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.

¶12

Heard Mrs. Aparna Nandakumar, learned counsel for the appellant/assessee and Mrs.Hema Muralikrishnan, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondent/revenue.

¶13

This appeal is directed against an order passed in WP No.10019 of 2019 dated 29.04.2019, filed by the appellant herein.

¶14

The said writ petition was filed challenging an order passed by the 1^st respondent dated 22.03.2019 in a stay application filed by the appellant/assessee, before the 1^st respondent, in an appeal filed against the order of assessment dated 29.12.2017, for the Assessment Years 2010-11 to 2013-14.

¶15

The learned Single Judge by the impugned order held that the order passed in the stay application by the 1^st respondent / appellate

¶16

authority, does not call for interference. The matter was taken on appeal and the Division Bench, while entertaining the appeal, by order dated 30.05.2019 granted an order of interim stay. The appeal has been pending since then.

¶17

It is submitted by the learned counsels on either side that the statutory appeal before the 1^st respondent is ripe for hearing and that there is every likelihood that the appeal itself could be disposed of at an early date.

¶18

Considering the fact that there has been an order of interim stay in force, since 30.05.2019, we are of the view that it would be inequitable to modify or alter the interim order at this juncture, especially, when the main appeal is ripe for hearing before the 1^st respondent. Accordingly, the appeal stands disposed of and the interim order granted on 30.05.2019, shall continue to remain in force, till the appeal filed by the appellant before the 1^st respondent is heard and disposed of. Since the appeal is of the year 2018, having been filed on 30.01.2018, the 1^st respondent is requested to dispose of the appeal at an early date, preferably, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. No costs.

¶19

Sd/-

¶20

Assistant Registrar(CS VI) //True Copy//

¶21

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶22

ars/raja

¶23

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶24

¶25

1.The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Aayakar Bhavan, 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai – 600 034. 2.The Income Tax Officer, Non Corp Ward.1(2), Room No.306, III Floor, New Block Aayakar Bhavan, 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai – 600 034.

¶26

W.A.No.1748 of 2019 and CMP No.11811 of 2019 LN(CO) KKV/25/09/2020

¶27

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Jayanthi Seeman v. the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-I

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jayanthi Seeman v. the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-I

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Shri J.S.Kamath

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Skm Animal Feeds and Foods Ltd.

The Commissioner of Incometax, Vs M/S. Hyundai Motor India Ltd.

The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs M/S. Gita Wind Energy

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs M/S.Tidel Park Ltd.

Principal Commissioner Vs N. Muthusamy