F. Rukiya Bai v. The Income Tax Settelment Commission, Additional Bench, 488-489, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 035
High Court
25 Jul 2017 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · hc_cis_mas
Parties
F. Rukiya Bai v. The Income Tax Settelment Commission, Additional Bench, 488-489, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 035
Date of order
25 Jul 2017
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
Case summary
In F. Rukiya Bai v. The Income Tax Settelment Commission, Additional Bench, 488-489, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 035, the High Court (2017) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: 3.In view of the same, this writ petition is allowed.
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
DATED : 25.07.2017
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAMW.P.No.28916 of 2004
F. Rukiya Bai
Vs.
... Petitioner
1. The Income Tax Settelment Commission, Additional Bench, 488-489, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 035.
2. The Union of India, Rep. by the Chairman, Central Board of Direct Taxes, North Block, New Delhi.
3. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Central, Cochin.
4. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-I (3), Ernakulam.
5. Harris Zain6. Gulshan Ahmed Rahman7. Zeenath N. Patel8. Mumtaz Garouk9. Harshad Zain10. Roshan Ashraf
... Respondents
Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution ofIndia to issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for records on thefiles of the first respondent herein in Settlement ApplicationNos.13/CHN/5/95-IT and 13/CHN/126/95-IT dated 23.03.2004 andquash the proceedings of the first respondent herein inSettlement Application Nos.13/CHN/5/95-IT and 13/CHN/126/95-ITdated 23.03.2004.
For Petitioner : Mr.N.Prasad
For Respondents : M/s. Hema Muralikrishnan,
Standing Counsel (Income Tax)
O R D E R
Heard Mr.N.Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner andM/s. Hema Muralikrishnan, learned Standing Counsel for therespondents.
2.The learned counsel on either side submitted that theissue involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by theorder passed by this Court in the case of “C.V.Mathew and JoseMathew Vs. The Income Tax Settlement Commission and others inW.P.No.5365 & 5364 of 2005”.
3.In view of the same, this writ petition is allowed. Nocosts. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS VIII) //True Copy// Sub Assistant RegistrarabrTo
1. The Income Tax Settelment Commission, Additional Bench, 488-489, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 035.
2. The Chairman, The Union of India, Central Board of Direct Taxes, North Block, New Delhi.
3. The Commissioner of Income Tax Central, Cochin.
4. The Assistant Commissioner of Income TaxCentral Circle-I (3), Ernakulam.
+ 1 cc to Mr.N. Inbarajan, Advocate Sr.52587+ 1 cc tdo Mrs.Hama Muralikrishnan, Advocate SR.52577
PVS(CO)EU 30.08.17
W.P.No.28916 of 2004
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.
EaseValue