British Agro Products (India) P Ltd.,Rep.by Its Managing Director Dr.akilan Ramnathanno v. The Principal Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax-1 (Tamil Nadu & Puducherry) Income Tax Department

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR Writ Petition No.10380 of 2022 British Agro Products (India) P Ltd.,Rep.by its Managing Director Dr.Akilan RamnathanNo.9, State Bank Officers ColonyShastri Nagar, Adyar, Chennai 600 020....Petitioner -Vs- 1. The Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax-1 (Tamil Nadu & Puducherry) Income Tax Department, 121, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai 600 034. (Tamil Nadu & Puducherry) Income Tax Department, 121, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai 600 034. 2. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1 Income Tax Department, 121, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai 600 034. Income Tax Department, 121, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai 600 034. 3. The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax National faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi-110003. ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution ofIndia praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to call forthe records of the writ petitioner company on the file of therespondents to dispose of petitioner company appeal withacknowledgement No.718145870221021 dated 22.10.2021 within astipulated time. For Petitioner : Mr.V.Ayyadurai, Senior Advocate for Mr.Velmurugan For Respondents : Mr.D.Prabhu Mukunth Arunkumar Junior Standing Counsel The prayer sought for herein is for a Writ of Mandamus tocall for the records of the writ petitioner company appeal withacknowledgement No.718145870221021 dated 22.10.2021 and todirect the respondent to dispose the same within a stipulated https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ time. 2. The petitioner is an assessee under the respondents.With regard to the assessment year 2018-2019, an order ofassessment was passed under Section 143(3) read with Section144B of the Income Tax, Act 1961 (In short 'the Act') by orderdated 23.09.2021. 3. As against the assessment order, even though thepetitioner filed a writ petition unsuccessfully, subsequently hedecided to file an appeal ie., regular quantum appeal before theCommissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ie., the appellateauthority and such appeal was filed on 22.10.2021 in prescribedformat before the appellate authority, which is still pending. 4. In the meanwhile, an application for stay also seems tohave been filed before the assessing authority under Section 220(6) of the Act and that is also said to be pending and yet to bedecided by the concerned authority. 5. Therefore, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for thepetitioner assessee submits that, if the quantum appeal filed bythe petitioner and is pending before the appellate authority isdecided on merits and in accordance with law at an early date,that will give solace to the petitioner, as the issue raisedbefore the appellate authority on merits certainly will go infavour of the assessee. Hence, the learned Senior Counsel forthe petitioner seeks the indulgence of this Court to issue adirection by way of mandamus to the respondents. 6. Heard Mr.D.Prabhu Mukunth Arunkumar, learned JuniorStanding Counsel appearing for the respondent Revenue, who wouldsubmit that, if at all the petitioner has to get any orders withregard to the consequential action pursuant to the assessmentorder, and in this regard already the petitioner has approachedthe assessing authority and filed a petition for stay, the samecan be persuaded by the assessee, where it is open to theassessing authority to decide the same on merits, of course byimposing certain conditions of his discretion. This mechanismis available under Section 220(6) of the Act. Therefore for suchpurpose, the petitioner need not seek the indulgence of thisCourt to issue a direction to the respondent appellate authorityto decide the appeal at an early date in view of the largependency of appeals pending before the appellate authority, hecontended. 7. I have considered the submissions made by the learnedcounsel on either side and have perused the materials placed onrecord. 8. Insofar as the prayer sought for herein is concerned, it is only for a mandamus to direct the appellate authority todecide the appeal filed by the petitioner on merits within atime frame. In this context, even though attempt has alreadybeen made by the assessee to file a petition for stay, the sameis also still pending, where no decision seems to have beentaken. When that being so, the petitioner assessee may not beremedy-less during the pendency of the appeal. Therefore thisCourt, taking into account the facts and circumstances andhaving regard to the submissions made by both sides, is inclinedto dispose of this writ petition with the following order. 9. That there shall be a direction to the respondents /appellate authority to decide and dispose of the appeal filed bythe petitioner dated 22.10.2021 against the assessment orderdated 23.09.2021 for the Assessment Year 2018-2019 on merits andin accordance with law, after giving a fair hearing to thepetitioner within a period of four months from the date ofreceipt of a copy of this order. With the above direction, thiswrit petition is disposed of. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS IX) //True Copy// KST Sub Assistant Registrar To 1. The Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax-1 (Tamil Nadu & Puducherry) Income Tax Department, 121, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai 600 034.2. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1 Income Tax Department, 121, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai 600 034.3. The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax National faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi-110003. +1cc to Mr.Hema Muralikrishnan, Advocate, S.R.No.28802+1cc to Mr.Velmurugan, Advocate, S.R.No.28334 RSV(CO)CT-09/05/2022