Aparajitha Foundations,Rep By Its Trustee,Mr.nagaraj Krishnan,Block v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions), Aayakar Bhavan, Annexe Iii Floor
High Court
07 Aug 2024 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · hc_cis_mas
Parties
Aparajitha Foundations,Rep By Its Trustee,Mr.nagaraj Krishnan,Block v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions), Aayakar Bhavan, Annexe Iii Floor
Date of order
07 Aug 2024
Assessment year(s)
2018-2019
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Aparajitha Foundations,Rep By Its Trustee,Mr.nagaraj Krishnan,Block v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions), Aayakar Bhavan, Annexe Iii Floor, the High Court (2024) decided the matter under Section 220 of the Income-tax Act.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
W.P.Nos.6305 & 6309 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated : 07.08.2024
CORAM
THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY
W.P.Nos.6305 & 6309 of 2024
andW.M.P.Nos.7013, 7005 & 7006 of 2024
Aparajitha Foundations,Rep by its Trustee,Mr.Nagaraj Krishnan,Block No.401, 4[th] Floor,No.5A, Rathinasamy Nadar Road,Bi Bi Kulam,Madurai 625 002,Tamil Nadu
... Petitioner in both petitions
Vs.
1.The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Aayakar Bhavan, Annexe III Floor, No.121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 034.
2.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions),
May Flower Mid City Building, 1510, Trichy Road, Coimbatore 641 018.
1/8
3.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, National Faceless Assessment Circle, Mayur Bhawan, Cannaught Lane, Barakhamba, New Delhi 110 001.
W.P.Nos.6305 & 6309 of 2024
4.The Commissioner of Income Tax,
National Faceless Assessment Circle, Mayur Bhawan, Cannaught Lane, Barakhamba, New Delhi 110 001. ... Respondents in W.P.No.6305 of 2024
1.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), May Flower Mid City Building, 1510, Trichy Road, Coimbatore 641 018.
2.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,
National Faceless Assessment Circle, Mayur Bhawan, Cannaught Lane, Barakhamba, New Delhi 110 001.
3.The Commissioner of Income Tax, National Faceless Assessment Circle, Mayur Bhawan, Cannaught Lane, Barakhamba, New Delhi 110 001.
... Respondents in W.P.No.6309 of 2024
Common Prayer:
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the
2/8
W.P.Nos.6305 & 6309 of 2024
records in DIN & Letter dated 01.12.2023 and 28.02.2024 and bearing Nos.ITBA/COM/F/17/2023-24/1058567799(1)and ITBA/COM/F/17/2023-24/1061657409(1) respectively for the Assessment Year 2018-2019, issued by the 1[st] respondent, quash the same and consequently, direct the respondents to treat the peittioner as not being in default as per Section 220(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
For Petitioner in both petitions : Mr.P.Vinod Kumar
For Respondent in both petitions
: Mr.V.Mahalingam,
Senior Standing counsel
COMMON ORDER
These writ petitions have been filed challenging the impugned
orders dated 01.12.2023 and 28.02.2024 for the Assessment Year 2018-2019 and to direct the respondents to treat the petitioner as not being in default as per Section 220(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the original assessment orders were passed by the respondent-Department and the petitioner preferred an appeal against the said assessment orders 3/8
W.P.Nos.6305 & 6309 of 2024
before the 4th respondent. In the meantime, a stay petition was filed before the 2nd respondent and the same was rejected and hence, the 2nd stay petition was filed before the 1st respondent, however, the same was also rejected. Hence, aggrieved over the dismissal of the aforesaid stay petitions, these writ petitions have been filed by the petitioner. After filing of this petition, this Court has granted an order of interim stay.
3. Further, he would submit that the appeals, which were filed against the original assessment orders, were pending before the respondents from 01.03.2022. Hence, he requests this Court to direct the respondents to dispose of the appeals filed by the petitioner and also requests to extend the interim order granted by this Court till the disposal of the aforesaid appeals.
4. In reply, the learned Senior Standing counsel for the respondents would request this Court to extend the interim order already granted by this Court, subject to the payment of 20% of the penalty amount by the petitioner.
4/8
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Senior Standing counsel for the respondents and also perused the entire materials available on record.
3. Further, he would submit that the appeals, which were filed against the original assessment orders, were pending before the respondents from 01.03.2022. Hence, he requests this Court to direct the respondents to dispose of the appeals filed by the petitioner and also requests to extend the interim order granted by this Court till the disposal of the aforesaid appeals.
4. In reply, the learned Senior Standing counsel for the respondents would request this Court to extend the interim order already granted by this Court, subject to the payment of 20% of the penalty amount by the petitioner.
4/8
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Senior Standing counsel for the respondents and also perused the entire materials available on record.
6. In the present cases, the applications filed by the petitioner for an order of stay was already rejected by two Authorities, i.e., the respondents 2 and 3. These petitions have been filed as 3rd attempt and after filing of these petitions, this Court granted the order of stay vide order dated 11.03.2024.
7. According to the petitioner, though they are not liable to pay any tax, the Assessment Officer had arrived at a conclusion that the petitioner was under-reporting, which is incorrect. When the stay application was filed, the respondents 2 and 3 had also rejected the same under the impression that the petitioner is under-reporting.
5/8
4thth respondent to dispose of the appeals filed by the petitioner.
W.P.Nos.6305 & 6309 of 2024
8. In view of the above, this Court feels it appropriate to direct the
4thth respondent to dispose of the appeals filed by the petitioner.
Accordingly, this Court passes the following order:
i) The 4th respondent/the Commissioner of Income
Tax is directed to dispose of the appeals filed by the petitioner, against the original assessment orders dated 09.04.2021 and 31.01.2022, within a period of 4 months
from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
ii) The interim order already granted by this Court vide order dated 11.03.2024 is extended till the disposal of the appeal filed by the petitioner.
9. With the above directions, these writ petitions are disposed of.
No cost. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is also
closed.
Speaking/Non-speaking orderIndex : Yes / NoNeutral Citation : Yes / Nonsa
07.08.2024
6/8
To
1.The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions),
Aayakar Bhavan, Annexe III Floor, No.121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 034.
2.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), May Flower Mid City Building, 1510, Trichy Road, Coimbatore 641 018.
3.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, National Faceless Assessment Circle, Mayur Bhawan, Cannaught Lane, Barakhamba, New Delhi 110 001.
4.The Commissioner of Income Tax, National Faceless Assessment Circle, Mayur Bhawan, Cannaught Lane, Barakhamba, New Delhi 110 001.
7/8
8/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.6305 & 6309 of 2024
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY.J.,
nsa
W.P.Nos.6305 & 6309 of 2024and W.M.P.Nos.7013, 7005 & 7006 of 2024
07.08.2024
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.