Case Law β€Ί High Court β€Ί Mr.r.karunakaran v. Income Tax Officer,N...

Mr.r.karunakaran v. Income Tax Officer,Non Corporate Ward 11(3)Chennai – 6

High Court 25 May 2022 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court Β· hc_cis_mas
Parties
Mr.r.karunakaran v. Income Tax Officer,Non Corporate Ward 11(3)Chennai – 6
Date of order
25 May 2022
Assessment year(s)
2015-2016
Outcome
Other

The order β€” as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Mr.r.karunakaran v. Income Tax Officer,Non Corporate Ward 11(3)Chennai – 6, the High Court (2022) decided the matter.

Summary auto-generated from the order below β€” read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

Sections referenced in this judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 25.05.2022 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN W.P.NO.11535 OF 2022ANDW.M.P.NOS.11012 AND 11013 OF 2022 Mr.R.Karunakaran ... Petitioner Vs. Income Tax Officer,Non Corporate Ward 11(3)Chennai – 6.... Respondent Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution ofIndia, for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, to call for theimpugned proceedings dated 05.04.2022 of the respondent inPAN:AFWPK2956Erelating to the assessment year 2015-2016 issuedin DIN & Notice No:ITBA/AST/F/148A/2022-23/1042522776(1) underclause(d) of section 148A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and theconsequential impugned proceedings dated 05.04.2022 of therespondent in PAN: relating to the assessment year2015-2016 issued in DIN & Notice No.ITBA/AST/S/148 1/2022-23/1042526550 (1) under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961and quash both the impugned proceedings as issued withoutgranting reasonable opportunity to file objections and also thepersonal hearing as contemplated under clause (b) of Section148A of the Income Tax Act and also passed without consideringthe objections dated 24.03.2022 filed by the petitioner alongwith the documents on 30.03.2022. For Petitioner : Mr. P.Rajkumar For Respondent : Mr.Prabhu Mukunth Arunkumar, Junior Standing Counsel O R D E R The petitioner has challenged the impugned proceedingsdated 5.4.2022 disposing of the notice under Section 148A of theIncome Tax Act, 1961. 2. It is submitted that the mandatory period prescribedunder Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 has not beencomplied inasmuch as the minimum period required for respondinghas not been given to the petitioner. It is further noticedthat the impugned order seems to indicate that the petitionerhas not responded though the petitioner has uploaded of theinformation required. 3. Considering the same, I am inclined to quash theimpugned order and remit the case back to the respondent to passappropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, withina period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of thisorder. 4. This Writ Petition stands disposed in terms of the aboveobservation. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneouspetitions are closed. Sd/-Vacation Officer //True Copy//Sub Assistant Registrar nvi/kkd To The Income Tax Officer,Non Corporate Ward 11(3)Chennai – 6. +1cc to Mr. P.Rajkumar, Advocate, S.R.No.31710+1cc to M/s.Hema Muralikrishnan, Advocate, S.R.No.31719 W.P.No.11535 of 2022 andW.M.P.Nos.11012 and 11013 of 2022 SRA(CO)PM/27/05/2022
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
βœ… Defend a reassessment (Sec 148) notice β†’ πŸ’¬ 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 β€” 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 Β· Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
Β© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP Β· LLPIN ACN-4920 Β· Jaipur, Rajasthan