Disposed

Shri T.v.Magaadevan v. the Depuity Commissioner of

Madras HC9 Jan 2026TCA/404/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Tax case appeals for assessment years 2004-05 and 2005-06 were closed as the appellant was reported deceased and notice was returned undelivered; substantial questions of law were left unanswered with liberty for legal heirs to pursue the matter.

What did the court decide?

Appeals closed returning substantial questions of law unanswered; no costs; copy of order to be served on appellant's address for legal heirs.

Shri T.v.Magaadevan Vs the Depuity Commissioner of — Income Tax | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

TCA No. 404 of 2014

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 09-01-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR

¶8

TCA No. 404 of 2014 AND TCA NO. 405 OF 2014

¶9

Shri T.V.Magaadevan 5, First Cross St, Parisuthm Ngr,

¶10

Thanjavur 613 001

¶11

..Appellant in both T.C.(A)s

¶12

¶13

The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle Ii (4) Chennai.

¶14

Respondent in both T.C.(A)s

¶15

For Appellant(s): Sole Appellant -deceased

¶16

For Respondent(s): Mr.D.Prabhu Mukunth Arunkumar Senior Standing Counsel

¶17

Common Prayer: Appeals filed under Section 260A of IT Act, 1961 against order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Chennai Bench ‘B’ dated 28.09.2012 in ITA.Nos.367 & 368/MDS/2011 for AY 2004-05 & 2005-06.

¶18

__________ Page 1 of 4

¶19

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

¶20

TCA No. 404 of 2014

¶21

Common Judgment

¶22

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by Dr.Anita Sumanth J.)

¶23

Since Mr.K.Ravi, learned counsel who had initially instituted the Tax

¶24

Case (Appeals) had reported no instructions, private notice was directed to be served on the appellant.

¶25

Mr.D.Prabhu Mukunth Arunkumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel

¶26

for the respondent reports today that the private notice sent to the appellant has been returned with the endorsement ‘deceased’.

¶27

In light of the aforesaid, these Tax Case (Appeals) relating to assessment years 2004-05 and 2005-06 are closed returning the substantial questions of law unanswered. No costs.

¶28

Let a copy of this order be served upon the address of the appellant as set out in the cause title to enable the legal heirs, if any, and if they are so inclined, to pursue the matter further.

¶29

(A.S.M.,J.) (M.S.K.,J.)

¶30

09-01-2026

¶31

Index: Yes/No Speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes SL

¶32

__________ Page 2 of 4

¶33

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

¶34

TCA No. 404 of 2014

¶35

¶36

The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle Ii (4) Chennai.

¶37

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Chennai Bench ‘B’, Chennai.

¶38

__________ Page 3 of 4

¶39

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

¶40

TCA No. 404 of 2014

¶41

DR.ANITA SUMANTH J.

¶42

AND

¶43

MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR J.

¶44

¶45

TCA No. 404 of 2014 AND TCA NO. 405 OF 2014

¶46

09-01-2026

¶47

__________ Page 4 of 4

¶48

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

Shri T.v.Magaadevan v. the Depuity Commissioner of

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri T.v.Magaadevan v. the Depuity Commissioner of

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

G.Shah Nawaz Vs The District Collector

K.B.Edison Vs The Secretary to Government

Dishnet Wireless Limited Vs the Union of India, Rep by the

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs M/S Best&Crompton

Bld Design Studio Vs The Assistant Commissioner of GST and Central Excise

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Gwl Properties Ltd.