A.vijayaka v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax Central I, New
High Court
28 Jan 2010 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · hc_cis_mas
Parties
A.vijayaka v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax Central I, New
Date of order
28 Jan 2010
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In A.vijayaka v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax Central I, New, the High Court (2010) decided the matter.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN
A.Vijayaka... Petitioner in W.P.No.23065 of 2009V.Premalatha... Petitioner in W.P.No.23068 of 2009Versus
1.The Commissioner of Income Tax Central I, New No.46, Old No.108, M.G.Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034.
2.The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals I), New No.46, Old No.108, M.G.Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034.
3.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle I (2) New No.46, Old No.108, M.G.Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034...Respondents in W.P.Nos.23065 and 23068 of 2009
PRAYER IN W.P.NO.23065 OF 2009: Writ petition has been filed underArticle 226 of The Constitution of India to issue a Writ ofCertiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the firstrespondent in C No.1571/49-55/C-I/2009-10 and to quash the orderdated 06.10.2009 and direct the first respondent to grant absoluteand unconditional stay of collection of tax demand and interestrelating to the assessment years 2001-02 to 2007-08 pendingdisposal of the appeals before the second respondent.
PRAYER IN W.P.NO.23068 OF 2009: Writ petition has been filed underArticle 226 of The Constitution of India to issue a Writ ofCertiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the firstrespondent in C No.1571/35-41/C-I/2009-10 and to quash the orderdated 07.10.2009 and direct the first respondent to grant absoluteand unconditional stay of collection of tax demand and interestrelating to the assessment years 2001-02 to 2007-08 pendingdisposal of the appeals before the second respondent.
For Petitioners For Respondents
: Mr.P.Rameshkumar
: Mr.K.Subramanian
COMMON ORDER
Today, when these writ petitions were taken up for hearing,the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners have submittedthat these writ petitions have become infructuous. He has alsomade an endorsement to that effect.
2. Based on the submission made by the learned counselappearing for the petitioners and in view of the endorsement made,these writ petitions are dismissed as infructuous. No costs.
Sd/- Asst.Registrar. /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar.arrTo1.The Commissioner of Income Tax Central I, New No.46, Old No.108, M.G.Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034.2.The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals I), New No.46, Old No.108, M.G.Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034.3.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle I (2) New No.46, Old No.108, M.G.Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034.2 ccs to Mr.R.Sivaraman, Advocate, SR. 5390 and 53931 cc to Mr.K. Subramaniam, Advocate, SR. 5160
NM (CO)kk 24/2
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.