Case Law β€Ί High Court β€Ί P.srinivasan v. The Deputy Commissioner...

P.srinivasan v. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-Ii (2)

High Court 19 Jul 2017 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court Β· hc_cis_mas
Parties
P.srinivasan v. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-Ii (2)
Date of order
19 Jul 2017
Assessment year(s)
1995-96
Outcome
Other

Case summary

In P.srinivasan v. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-Ii (2), the High Court (2017) decided the matter.

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

The order β€” as passed by the High Court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAMW.P.No.29561 of 2003 P.Srinivasan ... Petitioner Vs. 1. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-II (2), 121, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai – 600 034. 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Central-II, Chennai – 600 034. 3. The Income Tax Appeallate Tribunal β€œB” Bench, Rajaji Bhavan, Besant Nagar, Chennai – 600 090. ... Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution ofIndia to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for therecords of the petitioner in GIR No.7035 on the file of thefirst respondent and quash the impugned notice dated 22.09.2003and consequently direct the second and third respondents todispose of the stay petition for the assessment year 1995-96 and1999-2000. For Petitioner : Mr.Venkatanarayanan for M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar For Respondents : M/s.A.P.Srinivas & A.N.Jayaprathap (For R1 & R2) O R D E R Heard Mr.Venkatanarayanan, learned counsel for thepetitioner, Mr.A.P.Srinivas & Mr.A.N.R.Jayaprathap learnedcounsel for the respondents 1 and 2. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2.The petitioner challenged the impugned notice underSection 226(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. At the time, thewrit petition was filed, no interim order was granted and noticewas only ordered in the stay petition. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioner does not have anywritten instruction from petitioner. In any event, the appealpetition as well as the stay petition which were moved beforethe Tribunal by now ought to have been disposed of. 4.Therefore, the writ petition is closed giving liberty tothe petitioner to workout his remedies on merits in accordancewith law, if still need arises. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS III) //True Copy// Sub Assistant RegistrarabrTo1. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-II (2), 121, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai – 600 034.2. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Central-II, Chennai – 600 034. 3. The Income Tax Appeallate Tribunal β€œB” Bench, Rajaji Bhavan, Besant Nagar, Chennai – 600 090. +1cc to M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar, Advocate, S.R.No.51192 W.P.No.29561 of 2003RK(CO)CA(04/08/2017)
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
βœ… File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) 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