Petitioner filed a writ petition challenging the rejection of her stay application. Dismissing the appeal without affording a personal hearing, the High Court quashed the order and remanded it for reconsideration.
Impugned order dated 09.11.2023 is quashed and matter remanded for rehearing with personal hearing within four weeks.
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.
W.P.No.35539 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 03.01.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY
W.P.No.35539 of 2023 and W.M.P.No.35498 of 2023
Shiva Jyothi ... Petitioner
-vs-
The Income Tax Officer, Ward 3 Puducherry, Puducherry. ... Respondent
PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of the respondent contained in Impugned order issued vide DIN & Letter No.ITBA/COM/F/17/2023-24/1057851597(1) dated 09.11.2023 for the assessment year 2015 - 16 passed by the respondent, quash the same as arbitrary, unjust and illegal.
1/7
W.P.No.35539 of 2023
For Petitioner : Mr.Mansoor Ali for M/s.Sundar Law Associates
For Respondent : Ms.S.Premalatha, Jr.SC (IT)
ORDER
The petitioner assails an order by which the stay application of the petitioner was rejected. The petitioner asserts that her income does not exceed the taxable limit and that, therefore, she was not under an obligation to file Income Tax returns. Upon receipt of a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, it is submitted that the assessment was completed pursuant thereto under assessment order dated 28.03.2023. Consequently, a demand notice was issued for a sum of Rs.42,22,642/- and penalty proceedings was also initiated. In those circumstances, the petitioner assailed the assessment order by filing a statutory appeal before the appellate authority. The stay application was filed in these circumstances before the respondent.
2/7
W.P.No.35539 of 2023
3/7
W.P.No.35539 of 2023
respondent. She submits that the petitioner was provided an opportunity to file written submissions along with supporting
documents. She further submits that the petitioner failed to provide any documents to prove financial difficulties and, therefore, the impugned order does not call for any interference. She further submits that such order was passed in light with the revised instructions issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes under Office Memorandum dated 31.07.2017.
4/7
W.P.No.35539 of 2023
03.01.2024
rna Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No Neutral Citation: Yes / No
To
The Income Tax Officer, Ward 3 Puducherry, Puducherry.
5/7
W.P.No.35539 of 2023
SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY,J
rna
W.P.No.35539 of 2023 and W.M.P.No.35498 of 2023
6/7
W.P.No.35539 of 2023
03.01.2024
7/7
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the rejection of stay application without providing a personal hearing constitutes a violation of procedural fairness requiring court intervention.
Shiva Jyothi
The Income Tax Officer, Ward 3 Puducherry, Puducherry
SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
