The High Court of Madras dismissed two writ petitions filed by taxpayers challenging an order passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax. The court held that recovery proceedings could not continue during the pendency of the appeal, which had since been disposed of.
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: 21.01.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN
W.P. Nos. 26720 & 26721 of 2014
and
M.P. Nos. 1,1 of 2014
C.Ashok Chand
... Petitioner
in W.P.No.26720 of 2014
A.Roshankumar
... Petitioner
in W.P.No.26721 of 2014
Vs
Circle I, 2 Barracks Cross Street,
Officer's Line, Vellore.
Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034. ... Respondents in both W.Ps
Prayer in W.P.No.26720 of 2014: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the first respondent in PAN: AAAHC0603B/ACIT/VLR relating to the application made by the petitioner for stay of demand, and quash the order dated 22.08.2014 in PAN: AAAHC0603B/ACIT/VLR passed by the first respondent for the assessment year 2011-12 and direct the second respondent to dispose of the appeal preferred by the petitioner before him with a time frame.
Prayer in W.P.No.26721 of 2014: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the first respondent in PAN: AEZPR2945A/ACIT/VLR relating to the application made by the petitioner for stay of demand, and quash the order dated 22.08.2014 in PAN: AEZPR2945A/ACIT/VLR passed by the first respondent for the assessment year 2011-12 and direct the second respondent to dispose of the appeal preferred by the petitioner before him with a time frame.
For Petitioner : Mr.N.V.Balaji (in both W.Ps) For Respondents: Ms.Hema Muralikrishnan (in both W.Ps) Senior Standing Counsel
COMMON ORDER
Mr.N.V.Balaji, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that nothing survives in these writ petitions as the recovery proceedings were sought to be conducted during the pendency of the appeal. He further submits that the appeal itself has been disposed and therefore nothing survives for adjudication in these writ petitions. Recording the same, these Writ Petitions stand dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
arb
To
1. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,
Circle I, 2 Barracks Cross Street,
Officer's Line, Vellore.
2. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-III,
121, M.G.Road,
Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034.
+2ccs to Mrs. Hema Muralikrishnan, Advocate, Sr.No. 3504,3505
+2ccs to Mr.N.V.Balaji, Advocate, Sr.No. 3745 & 3746
W.P. Nos. 26720 & 26721 of 2014
and
M.P. Nos. 1,1 of 2014
SR(CO)
RMP(12/03/2021)
C. Ashok Chand
A. Roshankumar
The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle I, Vellore
The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-III, Chennai
C. Saravanan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
