Case LawHigh Court › Rafeeq Enterprises,Rep. By Its v. The Co...

Rafeeq Enterprises,Rep. By Its v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax

High Court 21 Aug 2025 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · mdubench
Parties
Rafeeq Enterprises,Rep. By Its v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax
Date of order
21 Aug 2025
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Rafeeq Enterprises,Rep. By Its v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax, the High Court (2025) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

Sections referenced in this judgment

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 21.08.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN W.P(MD)No.22788 of 2025 andW.M.P(MD)Nos.17874 and 17876 of 2025 Rafeeq Enterprises,Rep. by its Partner,Jasmine Hamila,6, 1[st] Floor Kaluvettri Lane Street,Tirunelveli Town,Tirunelveli District. ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The Commissioner of Income Tax, Office of the Commissioner of Income Tax, Tirunelveli District. 2.The Income Tax Officer, Office of the Income Tax Officer, Ward 4, Tirunelveli District. ...Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned demand notice issued by the second respondent in his proceedings DIN ITBA/RCV/F/17/2025-2026/1076257339(1) dated 16.05.2025 under Section 144 r/w Section 147 for an outstanding demand of 1/4 W.P(MD)No.22788 of 2025 Rs.7,71,01,000/- for the assessment year 2020 - 2021 and quash the same as illegal and consequentially to direct the Respondents to re-assess the income tax after providing an opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner qua the PAN No within the period that may be stipulated by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.P.Mohammed Suhail For M/s.Ajmal Associates For Respondent : Mr.T.Parekh Kumar ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned cousnel for the respondents. 2. The petitioner has challenged the impugned recovery notice asking the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.7,71,01,000/-. 3. However, it is noticed that the petitioner has earlier suffered an assessment order, dated 20.02.2025 for the assessment year 2020, which has not been challenged by the petitioner. Therefore, the writ petition challenging the impugned recovery notice dated 16.05.2025 is without any merits. That apart, 2/4 W.P(MD)No.22788 of 2025 the petitioner has an alternate remedy against the aforesaid assessment order, dated 20.02.2025. 4. Under these circumstances, the writ petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to work out the remedy under Section 246 A read with Section 249(3) of the Income Tax Act before the appellate Commissioner. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 21.08.2025 To 1.The Commissioner of Income Tax, Office of the Commissioner of Income Tax, Tirunelveli District. 2.The Income Tax Officer, Office of the Income Tax Officer, Ward 4, Tirunelveli District. 3/4 4/4 W.P(MD)No.22788 of 2025 C.SARAVANAN, J.sn W.P(MD)No.22788 of 2025 21.08.2025
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ Defend a reassessment (Sec 148) notice → 💬 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 — 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 · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan