Krishnamoorthy Packiyalakshmi v. The Income Tax Officer,Ward 1 (2) Trichy, Income Tax Department,2[Nd] Floor, Trichy Main Building,Williams Road,Cantonment, Tiruchirappalli

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURTDATED : 17.02.2022CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN Writ Petition (MD) No.6598 of 2020andW.M.P.(MD)No.5950 of 2020 Krishnamoorthy Packiyalakshmi ... Petitioner Versus The Income Tax Officer,Ward 1 (2) Trichy, Income Tax Department,2[nd] Floor, Trichy Main Building,Williams Road,Cantonment, Tiruchirappalli - 620001. ... Respondent PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution ofIndia praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, callingfor the records in ITBA/AST/S/144/2019-20/1023036756(1), dated24.12.2019, on the file of the respondent, quash the same as it isarbitrary, unreasonable and is against the principles of naturaljustice and direct the respondent to pass assessment order afreshafter giving an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner. For Petitioner: Mr.S.Karunakar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.N.Dilipkumar Senior Standing Counsel ORDER The petitioner has challenged the impugned assessment orderdated 24.12.2019 on the ground that the impugned order has beenpassed without giving adequate opportunity to the petitioner to givereply to the show cause notice dated 16.12.2019. 2.It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner hadmaintained proper books of accounts and had filed returns in timeand had offered the correct income for tax. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that between08.11.2016 and 30.12.2016, some of the petitioner's customers havedeposited demonetized currency to the account of the petitioner, asa result of which, the respondent issued a show cause notice for theAssessment Year 2017-2018 [previous year 2016-2017] and hadconfirmed the tax and interest of Rs.11,19,994/-. 4.The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits thatthe aforesaid amount cannot be taxed. The learned counsel for thepetitioner also submits that the petitioner has also maintainedhttps://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ proper books of accounts and also has paid Value Added Tax on thetransaction. 5.Opposing the prayer, the learned Senior Standing Counsel forthe respondent submits that the Writ Petition is without merits andthe petitioner ought to have filed statutory appeal under Section246-A of the Income Tax Act. It is further submitted that thepetitioner was issued with show cause notice on 16.12.2019 and thateven prior to 16.12.2019, a notice was issued to the petitioner.However, the petitioner failed to avail the opportunity andtherefore, the impugned order has been passed based on the availablematerials. 6.The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondentfurther submits that there is no dispute that the petitioner haddeposited a sum of Rs.8,95,000/- on various dates during the periodin dispute, for which, no tax was offered by the petitioner.7.I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and thelearned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondent. 8.Prima facie, I do not find any reason to interfere with theimpugned order in the Writ Petition. The petitioner has an alternateremedy by way of appeal before the Appellate Commissioner. However,the petitioner has filed the Writ Petition i.e., on 23.03.2020,after allowing the period of limitation prescribed under Section246-A of the Income Tax Act, to expire. 6.The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondentfurther submits that there is no dispute that the petitioner haddeposited a sum of Rs.8,95,000/- on various dates during the periodin dispute, for which, no tax was offered by the petitioner.7.I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and thelearned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondent. 8.Prima facie, I do not find any reason to interfere with theimpugned order in the Writ Petition. The petitioner has an alternateremedy by way of appeal before the Appellate Commissioner. However,the petitioner has filed the Writ Petition i.e., on 23.03.2020,after allowing the period of limitation prescribed under Section246-A of the Income Tax Act, to expire. 9.Therefore, without expressing any opinion as to which thepetitioner has a good case on merits or not, I am inclined todismiss this Writ Petition with liberty to the petitioner to file anappeal before the Appellate Commissioner under Section 246-A of theIncome Tax Act, within 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy ofthis order. Needless to state that it is open to the petitioner tomove an appropriate application under Section 220(6) of the IncomeTax Act before the respondent, who shall pass appropriate orders onmerits and in accordance with law taking note of the decision of theHon'ble Supreme Court in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax andothers vs. L.G. Electronics India Private Limited [2018 (18) SCC447]. If such appeal is filed, the appellate Commissioner shall takeup the same and dispose it on merits and in accordance with law,within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copyof this order. If appropriate application under Section 220(6) ofthe Income Tax Act is made before the respondent within 30 days,appropriate orders shall be passed in accordance with law. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Writ Petition (MD) No.6598 of 2020 10.This Writ Petition stands dismissed with the aboveobservation. No costs. Consequently, connected MiscellaneousPetition is closed. // True Copy // Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CS-III) / /2022Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) To The Income Tax Officer,Ward 1 (2) Trichy, Income Tax Department,2[nd] Floor, Trichy Main Building,Williams Road,Cantonment, Tiruchirappalli - 620001. +1 CC to M/s.N.DILIPKUMAR, Advocate ( SR-7226[F] dated 18/02/2022 )+1 CC to M/s.S.KARUNAKAR, Advocate ( SR-7584[F] dated 21/02/2022 ) WP (MD) No.6598 of 202017.02.2022 RS(25.02.2022) 3P-4C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/