Dismissed

Shri. Kailasam Raghavendra Rao v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

Madras HC2 Sept 2024WP/7791/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition and connected miscellaneous petitions seeking quashing of an income tax reassessment notice were dismissed as infructuous because the petitioner acknowledged the matter had become academic by endorsing the submission in the Court bundle.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition and connected miscellaneous petitions dismissed as infructuous; no costs.

Shri. Kailasam Raghavendra Rao Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income… — Income Tax | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P.No.7791 of 2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 02.09.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN

¶6

W.P.No.7791 of 2022

¶7

and

¶8

W.M.P.Nos.7815 and 7817 of 2022

¶9

Shri.Kailasam Raghavendra Rao

¶10

... Petitioner

¶11

Vs.

¶12

1.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle – 1(1), No.46, Mahatma Gandhi Road,

¶13

Chennai – 34.

¶14

2.The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central – 1, Chennai – 34. ... Respondents

¶15

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records on the file of the 1^st respondent in PAN No.AAAPR4013J and quash the impugned notice in ITBA/COM/M/17/2021-22/1033934238(1) issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 30.06.2021 for the Assessment Year 2015-16 by the 1^st respondent.

¶16

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶17

1/4

¶18

W.P.No.7791 of 2022

¶19

For Petitioner : M/s.Vandana Vyas For Respondents : Mr.ANR.Jaya Pratap Junior Standing Counsel

¶20

ORDER

¶21

When the matter was taken up for consideration, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that this writ petition has become infructuous and she has also made an endorsement to that effect in the Court bundle. Hence, nothing survives for adjudication in this Writ Petition.

¶22

In view of the above submission and also the endorsement made

¶23

by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petitions are also closed.

¶24

02.09.2024

¶25

Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order Neutral Citation : Yes/No jas

¶26

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶27

2/4

¶28

W.P.No.7791 of 2022

¶29

¶30

1.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle – 1(1), No.46, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai – 34.

¶31

2.The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central – 1, Chennai – 34.

¶32

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶33

3/4

¶34

W.P.No.7791 of 2022

C.SARAVANAN, J.

jas

W.P.No.7791 of 2022

and

W.M.P.Nos.7815 and 7817 of 2022

¶40

02.09.2024

¶41

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶42

4/4

Shri. Kailasam Raghavendra Rao v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri. Kailasam Raghavendra Rao v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

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

Tvl.Biostadt Indian Ltd. Vs The Assistant Commissioner (St)

B.Ravishankar Vs National Faceless Assessment Centre

Southern Agrifurane Industries (P) Ltd. Vs The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes and Sgst

P.Nagarajan Vs The Income Tax Officer (i/c)

M/s.Jayaprada Theatres Vs the Assistant Revenue Officer

Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. Vs the Official Assignee