Income Tax Officercorporate Ward 6(3) v. Pandian Anbalaganplot

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 05.11.2024 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R. SURESH KUMARAND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. SARAVANAN W.A.No.2506 of 2024 Income Tax OfficerCorporate Ward 6(3)No.121, Mahatma Gandhi RoadNungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034...Appellant Vs. Pandian AnbalaganPlot No.2, Door No.3, White filedKamarajar Nagar, MathavaramChennai – 600 051...Respondent Prayer: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 03.10.2023 in W.P.No.11841 of 2022. For the Appellant:Mr.V.Mahalingam and Ms.N.Premalatha For the Respondents:Ms.Amritha Sathyajthfor Mr.Suhrith Parthasarathy JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was authored by C.SARAVANAN, J.)This intra-Court appeal has been directed against the order dated 03.10.2023 made in W.P.No.11841 of 2022. W.A.No.2506 of 2024 2. The said writ petition has been filed by the Director of M/s.Speed and Safe Freight Systems India Private Limited. It appears that the said Company has been struck off from the official Register of Companies, perhaps on account of the defaults committed by the Director. The arguments before the Writ Court was that the Company ceased to exist as it has been struck off from the Register of Companies. 3. Before the Writ Court, the learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Revenue had cited Section 176 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Therefore, interpreting Section 176 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and Section 252 of the Companies Act, 2013, the learned Writ Court has set aside the assessment order. 4. We have heard Mr.V.Mahalingam and Ms.N.Premalatha, learned counsel for the appellant and Ms.Amritha Sathyajth, learned counsel appearing for Mr.Suhrith Parthasarathy, learned counsel for the respondent. 5. We are of the view that the order is liable to be set aside. It is not open for the Director of a defaulting Company, whose W.A.No.2506 of 2024 name is struck off from the official Register of Companies, to set aside the order. If at all, it was open for the petitioner herein to revive the Company and thereafter espouse the cause of the Company. As far as the independent rights of the Director under Section 179 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is concerned, it is open for the respondent to defend itself if any proceedings are initiated under Section 179 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 6. The writ appeal, accordingly, stands allowed with the above observations. There shall be no order as to costs. (R.S.K., J.) (C.S.N, J) 05.11.2024 Neutral Citation:Yes/No drm https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.No.2506 of 2024 R. SURESH KUMAR, J.ANDC. SARAVANAN, J.(drm) W.A.No.2506 of 2024 05.11.2024