R.s.manian v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax
High Court
27 Sep 2016 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · mdubench
Parties
R.s.manian v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax
Date of order
27 Sep 2016
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In R.s.manian v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax, the High Court (2016) decided the matter.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURTDATED: 27.09.2016
CORAM:THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE V.BHARATHIDASANW.P.(MD)No.17372 of 2016
R.S.Manian..Petitioner/PetitionerVs.1.The Commissioner of Income Tax, No.2, V.P.Rathinasamy Nadar Road, Bibikulam, Madurai 625 002.
2.The Income Tax Officer, No.2, V.P.Rathinasamy Nadar Road, Bibikulam, Madurai 625 002.
3.The Recovery Officer – 2, Income Tax Office, No.2, V.P.Rathinasamy Nadar Road, Bibikulam, Madurai 625 002. ..Respondents/Respondents
Prayer: The petition is filed under Article 226 of theConstitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing therespondents to consider the petition dated 29.07.2016 inaccordance with Rule 11 of Second Schedule of the Income Tax Act,within the time frame as stipulated by this Court.
For Petitioner: Mr.S.JawaharFor Respondents: Mr.S.Srimathy
O R D E R
This Writ petition has been filed to direct the respondentsto consider the petition dated 29.07.2016 in accordance with Rule11 of Second Schedule of the Income Tax Act, within the time frameas stipulated by this Court.
2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and thelearned standing counsel appearing for the respondents. 3.The petitioner purchased land in Survey Nos.223/6A3,223/6B2, 223/6C2, 223/15B, 289/6B and 270/2 to an extent of 0.85,0.85, 0.12, 0.49, 0.97 and 0.65 respectively for valuableconsideration on 02.11.2012 from one S.Rajendran. Subsequently,he came to know that the above said land has already been attachedby the Income Tax Department based on an attachment order dated21.12.2015. Since the petitioner purchased the property priorbefore the date of attachment, he made an application before the3rd respondent to conduct enquiry in accordance with Rule 11 ofSecond Schedule of the Income Tax Act. Since the said applicationhttps://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/is pending with the 3rd respondent without passing any order, thepresent Writ petition has been filed.
4.As the petitioner’s application is pending from29.07.2016, the 3[rd] respondent is directed to conduct enquiry andpass orders in accordance with law after providing notice to thepetitioner within a period of 6 weeks from the date of receipt ofa copy of this order. The Writ petition is disposed ofaccordingly. No costs.
Sd/-Assistant Registrar
/True Copy/
Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)Madurai-23.
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
To
1.The Commissioner of Income Tax, No.2, V.P.Rathinasamy Nadar Road, Bibikulam, Madurai 625 002. No.2, V.P.Rathinasamy Nadar Road, Bibikulam, Madurai 625 002.
2.The Income Tax Officer, No.2, V.P.Rathinasamy Nadar Road, Bibikulam, Madurai 625 002.
3.The Recovery Officer – 2, Income Tax Office,
No.2, V.P.Rathinasamy Nadar Road, Bibikulam, Madurai 625 002.
+1cc to Mr.S.Jawahar, Advocate in SR.56453+1cc to Mr.S.Srimathy, Advocate in SR.56452
nbj
PBK/GSV-PM/SAR-III 13.10.2016 ::2P-6C:
W.P.(MD)No.17372 of 201627.09.2016
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.