Case LawHigh Court › Gandhi Road Old Pet,Krishnagiri - 635 00...

Gandhi Road Old Pet,Krishnagiri - 635 001 v. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax

High Court 13 Mar 2020 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · hc_cis_mas
Parties
Gandhi Road Old Pet,Krishnagiri - 635 001 v. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax
Date of order
13 Mar 2020
Assessment year(s)
2017-18
Outcome
Allowed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Gandhi Road Old Pet,Krishnagiri - 635 001 v. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, the High Court (2020) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Decision: In the light of the above discussion, and since astatutory appeal has rightly been filed by the petitioner,this Court is unable to come to the aid of the petitioner asprayed for and this Writ Petition is dismissed.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

Sections referenced in this judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 13.03.2020 CORAM THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH Writ Petition No.6480 of 2020 and WMP. No.7666 of 2020 Baluudayar Ramanathan, Prop. Sri Vinayaka Traders, 350, Gandhi Road Old Pet,Krishnagiri - 635 001....Petitioner Vs. 1. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Salem. 2. Income Tax officer, Ward -1, Krishnagiri.... Respondents PRAYER: PETITION filed under Article 226 of the Constitutionof India praying for the issuance of Writ of Certiorari,calling for the records of the second respondent inPAN:AGEPR1102L dated 19.12.2019 passed under Sec.144 of theIncome Tax Act for the assessment year 2017-18 and quash thesame. For Petitioner: Mr.T.Vasudevan Senior Standing Counsel. O R D E R Mr.A.P.Srinivas, learned Senior Standing Counsel acceptsnotice for the respondents and is armed with instructions toproceed finally with the matter. Thus, by consent, the WritPetition is taken up for final disposal even at the stage ofadmission. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2. The challenge is to an order of assessment dated19.12.2019 passed in terms of the provisions of Section 144 ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'Act'). The case of thepetitioner is that he is a drop out from school and wasengaged in manual labour. By dint of hard work and experience,the petitioner has started a rice mundy business. 3. In respect of Assessment Year 2017-18, a return ofincome was filed on 04.11.2017 admitting income ofRs.6,16,050/-. Both manual as well as electronic notices underSection 143(2) dated 21.09.2018 were served upon the assessee.Thereafter, a questionnaire appears to have been issued andaccording to the petitioner, the questionnaire was onlyuploaded electronically but not served manually. Thus it wasmissed by the petitioner who failed to respond to the same. 4. In the meanwhile, a notice under Section 133(6) wasissued to the petitioners’ Bank calling for information inregard to the deposits made by the petitioner and it wasascertained by the Assessing Officer that a sum ofRs.49,02,000/- had been deposited in demonetized currency on10.11.2016. A questionnaire as well as a show cause noticedated 30.11.2019 thus came to be issued under Section 144 ofthe Act calling upon the petitioner to furnish a reply inrespect of the aforesaid deposits. The last show cause-noticeissued on 30.11.2019 proposed completion of the assessment tothe best of the Assessing Officers' judgment brining to taxthe deposits amount as unexplained income in the hands of thepetitioner. Since there was no explanation/responseforthcoming from petitioner, the entire amount was brought totax. The Officer also notes that as regards the total turnoverof a sum of Rs.6,33,42,771/- for A.Y.2017-18, the net profitwas only 1.08% as against 2.14% for the previous assessmentyear. 5. The main ground argued before me is lack ofopportunity in completing the assessment. However, thepetitioner has already availed of statutory appellate remedyand filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals). A stay petition has also been filed before theCommissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that has beenconditionally allowed on 17.02.2020 granting a scheme ofinstalments. The Officer, while noting that 5% of the demandhas been paid, directed the petitioner to remit 15% of theremaining demand in 10 equal monthly instalments commencingfrom 15[th] of March, 2020. Subject to compliance with theaforesaid condition, the balance of 80% has been stayed tilldisposal of first appeal or six months whichever is earlier.The petitioner has accepted order dated 17.02.2020. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 6. In the light of the above discussion, and since astatutory appeal has rightly been filed by the petitioner,this Court is unable to come to the aid of the petitioner asprayed for and this Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs.Connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. slTo //True copy// Sd/-Assistant Registrar(CS-III) Sub Assistant Registrar 1. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax,Salem. 2. Income Tax officer,Ward -1, Krishnagiri. +1cc to Mr.R.Janakiraman Advocate SR.No.23807+1cc to Mr.AP.Srinivas, Advocate SR.No.22859 SVI(CO)GMY(14/07/2020) Writ Petition No.6480 of 2020and WMP. No.7666 of 2020
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan