The court disposed of the writ petition without reaching on merits. It directed the respondent authority to dispose of the petitioner's pending statutory appeal within eight weeks of receiving the order.
The petitioner is directed to file the appeal within eight weeks from the date of receipt of this order.
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.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN AND
THE HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE J. UMA DEVI
WRIT PETITION No. 5862 of 2017
ORDER: (Per VRS,J)
Though the petitioner has come up with the above writ petition, challenging a notice issued under Section 226(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that for the present, the relief can be confined only to a direction to dispose of the statutory appeal within a timeframe.
petitioner, and Mr. B. Narasimha Sarma, learned senior standing counsel for Income Tax Department, appearing for the respondents 1 to 4.
VRS,J & JUD,,J WP No. 5862 of 2017
2
a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Consequently, miscellaneous petitions if any pending in the
writ petition shall stand dismissed. No order as to costs.
__________________________ V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN, J
______________ J. UMA DEVI, J. 16th March, 2017 cbs
VRS,J & JUD,,J WP No. 5862 of 2017
3
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN AND
THE HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE J. UMA DEVI
Writ Petition No. 5862 of 2017
(disposed of)
16th March, 2017
cbs
VRS,J & JUD,,J WP No. 5862 of 2017
4
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Income Tax Department is directed to dispose of a pending statutory appeal within a specified timeframe.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
PETITIONER
INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT
4TH RESPONDENT
V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN
J. UMA DEVI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
