Jose Charles Martin v. The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax Central-2, Chennai Central-2, Chennai
High Court
24 Apr 2025 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · hc_cis_mas
Parties
Jose Charles Martin v. The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax Central-2, Chennai Central-2, Chennai
Date of order
24 Apr 2025
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Jose Charles Martin v. The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax Central-2, Chennai Central-2, Chennai, the High Court (2025) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Decision: In light of the admitted position that the observations and the ratio in the aforesaid batch of Writ Appeals are wholly applicable to the present matters as well, in the interests of uniformity in approach, the present appeals and the connected Miscellaneous Petitions are also dismissed with no orde...
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
W.A.Nos.1355, 1354, 1353 & 1356 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 24.04.2025
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTHand
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. KUMARAPPAN
Writ Appeal Nos.1355, 1354, 1353 & 1356 of 2025and
CMP.Nos.10376, 10369, 10368 & 10373 of 2025
WP.No.1355 of 2025
Jose Charles Martin
.. Appellant
vs
1.The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Central-2, Chennai Central-2, Chennai
Income Tax Department
No.108, Nungambakkam High Road,
Chennai 600 034.
2.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,
Central Circle 2, Coimbatore,
Income Tax Department,
No.63, Race Course Road,
Coimbatore 641 018.
.. Respondents
Prayer : APPEAL filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 29.08.2024 in W.P.No.17771 of 2024 on the file of this Court.
W.A.Nos.1355, 1354, 1353 & 1356 of 2025
WP.No.1354 of 2025
M/s.Future Gaming and Hotel Services Private Limited
Represented by Managing DirectorNo.54, Mettupalayam Road,Cherannaagar, Coimbatore North,Coimbatore 641 029PAN: AABCM9751G.. Appellant
vs
1.The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax
Central-2, Chennai Income Tax Department No.108, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai 600 034.
2.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,
Central Circle 2, Coimbatore,
Income Tax Department, No.63, Race Course Road, Coimbatore 641 018.
.. Respondents
Prayer : APPEAL filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 29.08.2024 in W.P.No.17354 of 2024 on the file of this Court.
WP.No.1353 of 2025
Daisy Aadhav Arjuna
vs
.. Appellant
1.The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax
Coimbatore – 1, Income Tax Department No.63, Race Course Road, Coimbatore 641 018.
2/6
2.The Income Tax,
Non Corporate ward 4(3), Coimbatore Income Tax Department, No.63, Race Course Road, Coimbatore 641 018.
.. Respondents
Prayer : APPEAL filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 19.08.2024 in W.P.No.15526 of 2024 on the file of this Court.
WP.No.1356 of 2025
S.Martin
.. Appellant
vs
1.The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax
Central-2, Chennai Income Tax Department No.108, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai 600 034.
2.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2, Coimbatore, Income Tax Department, No.63, Race Course Road, Coimbatore 641 018.
.. Respondents
Prayer : APPEAL filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 29.08.2024 in W.P.No.17768 of 2024 on the file of this Court.
(In all WAs)For Appellants:Mr.A.S.SriramanFor Respondents:Mr.A.P.SrinivasSenior Standing Couonsel
COMMON JUDGMENT(Delivered by Dr.ANITA SUMANTH.,J)
Mr.A.P.Srinivas, learned Senior Standing Counsel accepts notice for
the respondents.
2. Both learned counsel would fairly bring to the notice of this Court orders passed in W.A.Nos.760 of 2025 etc. batch dated 25.03.2025, wherein an identical issue relating to centralisation of assessment in the case of various group entities has been considered and accede to the position that the ratio of that decision is wholly applicable to the present matters as well.
3. In the aforesaid judgment, the Division Bench of this Court after referring to the decision of the Delhi High Court in Dollar Gulati V. Principal Commissioner of Income-tax (471 ITR 96), which has been upheld by the Supreme Court in the Mark Gulati V. Principal Commissioner of Income-tax (469 ITR 1),has concluded as follows:
Mr.A.P.Srinivas, learned Senior Standing Counsel accepts notice for
the respondents.
2. Both learned counsel would fairly bring to the notice of this Court orders passed in W.A.Nos.760 of 2025 etc. batch dated 25.03.2025, wherein an identical issue relating to centralisation of assessment in the case of various group entities has been considered and accede to the position that the ratio of that decision is wholly applicable to the present matters as well.
3. In the aforesaid judgment, the Division Bench of this Court after referring to the decision of the Delhi High Court in Dollar Gulati V. Principal Commissioner of Income-tax (471 ITR 96), which has been upheld by the Supreme Court in the Mark Gulati V. Principal Commissioner of Income-tax (469 ITR 1),has concluded as follows:
19. In the case on hand, as we pointed out earlier, the show-cause notice refers to incriminating documents seized from the various premises of the appellants by the authorised officer under the control of Principal Director of Income Tax (Investigation), Kolkata. The documents seized would also affect the assessment in respect of the respective appellants. When the documents are seized from different premises of a group of companies/concerns, it is necessary for all the cases to be centralised or considered together at one place, so that there
W.A.Nos.1355, 1354, 1353 & 1356 of 2025
will be a coordinated investigation. The object of Section 127 is to meet situations as in the present case. The appellants admit that they are a group of companies may be carrying on different business. There is no mala fides alleged in this case as against the first respondent in any of the cases for passing the impugned order for transferring the cases from the office of the second respondent to the office of the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(4), Kolkata under Section 127 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The power under Section 127 is not circumscribed or limited by express language. We find no reasons to doubt the bona fides in this case. Therefore, we do not find any error or infirmity in the order of the learned single Judge and the same deserves to be confirmed and all the writ appeals fail.
4. In light of the admitted position that the observations and the ratio
in the aforesaid batch of Writ Appeals are wholly applicable to the present matters as well, in the interests of uniformity in approach, the present appeals and the connected Miscellaneous Petitions are also dismissed with no order as to costs.
slIndex:NoSpeaking orderNeutral Citation:Yes
[A.S.M., J] [C.K., J] 24.04.2025
To5/6
DR. ANITA SUMANTH,J.andC. KUMARAPPAN.,Jsl
1.The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Central-2, Chennai Income Tax Department No.108, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai 600 034.
2.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2, Coimbatore, Income Tax Department, No.63, Race Course Road, Coimbatore 641 018.
3.The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax
Coimbatore – 1, Income Tax Department No.63, Race Course Road, Coimbatore 641 018.
4.The Income Tax,
Non Corporate ward 4(3), Coimbatore Income Tax Department, No.63, Race Course Road, Coimbatore 641 018.
W.A.Nos.1355, 1354, 1353 & 1356 of 2025 andCMP.Nos.10376, 10369, 10368 & 10373 of 2025
24.04.2025
6/6
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.