Dismissed

Thiagarajan Jayalakshmi v. The Income Tax Officer

Madras HC19 Oct 2024WP(MD)/11777/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging a notice under Section 148A of the Income Tax Act. The court held that an order under Section 148A does not determine liability and a hearing is available during assessment proceedings under Section 147.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to put forth grounds/objections and request for personal hearing before the respondent before the assessment proceedings are completed.

Thiagarajan Jayalakshmi Vs The Income Tax… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.11777 of 2024

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 19.10.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.11777 of 2024 and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.10517 and 10518 of 2024

¶7

Thiagarajan Jayalakshmi

¶8

... Petitioner

¶9

Vs.

¶10

The Income Tax Officer, Non Corporate Ward 2(3), CR Buildings, No.2, Rathinasamy Nadar Road, Bibikulam, Madurai – 625 002.

¶11

... Respondent

¶12

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorari, to call for the impugned proceedings dated 27.03.2024 of the respondent in PAN - AIQPJ1214R relating to the assessment year 2017-2018 issued in DIN and Notice No.ITBA/AST/F/148A/2023-24/1063456397(1) under clause (d) of Section 148A of the Income Tax Act 1961 and the consequential proceedings dated 27.03.2024 of the respondent in PAN- AIQPJ1214R relating to the assessment year 2017-2018 issued in DIN and Notice

¶13

No.ITBA/AST/S/148-1/2023-24/1063456463(1) under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act 1961 and to quash both the proceedings as issued without granting personal hearing as contemplated under the Income Tax Act and also

¶14

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

¶15

1/5

¶16

W.P.(MD)No.11777 of 2024

¶17

passed without considering the objections dated 29.02.2024 filed by the petitioner along with the bank statements.

¶18

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Venkatasubramaniyan For Respondent : Mr.N.Dilip Kumar Standing Counsel

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

The present Writ Petition is filed challenging the order under clause (d) to

¶21

Section 148 A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on the premise that the petitioner has not been furnished with the notice and not been afforded with opportunity of personal hearing. Thus, the entire proceedings was made in violation of principles of natural justice.

¶22

2. At the outset, it is submitted by the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent that the petitioner while responding to the notice has not sought for personal hearing. An order under Section 148-A of the Act does not result in determination of any liability. It is always open to the petitioner to put forth all his objection along with relevant documentary evidence in support of his case during the course of assessment proceedings.

¶23

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

¶24

2/5

¶25

W.P.(MD)No.11777 of 2024

¶26

3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the respondent that the personal hearing would also be granted to the petitioner before the assessment proceedings are completed under Section 147 of the Act.

¶27

4. It is submitted by the learned Standing Counsel that during the course of assessment, it is always open to the petitioner to file its objection and the same would be considered and orders would be passed in accordance with law.

¶28

5. I find merit in the submission of the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent. In view thereof, the challenge to the impugned order stands

¶29

rejected. It is open to the petitioner to put forth his grounds/documents/objections and also request for personal hearing before the respondent. If any such request is made and objections are filed, the same shall be considered and orders shall be passed in accordance with law.

¶30

6. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶31

19.10.2024

¶32

NCC:yes/no Index:yes/no Internet:yes/no Nsr

¶33

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

¶34

3/5

¶35

W.P.(MD)No.11777 of 2024

¶36

To:

¶37

The Income Tax Officer, Non Corporate Ward 2(3), CR Buildings, No.2, Rathinasamy Nadar Road, Bibikulam, Madurai – 625 002.

¶38

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

¶39

4/5

¶40

W.P.(MD)No.11777 of 2024

¶41

MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.

¶42

Nsr

¶43

W.P.(MD)No.11777 of 2024

¶44

19.10.2024

¶45

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

¶46

5/5

Thiagarajan Jayalakshmi v. The Income Tax Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thiagarajan Jayalakshmi v. The Income Tax Officer

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

M/s. Sri Sadurmugan Traders Vs The Deputy Commissioner (St)

Noorbasha Vs The Chief Executive Officer

M/s. Aim Worldwide Pvt. Ltd. Vs The Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise (Appeals)

Syed Bawa Kassim .S Vs The Tamil Nadu Waqf Board

M/s.K.R.Estates Builders Vs The Assistant Commissioner(St)(Fac)

A. Thangavel Vs The Commissioner