Case LawHigh Court › Sathappan v. Income Tax Officer, Ward

Sathappan v. Income Tax Officer, Ward

High Court 27 Mar 2014 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · mdubench
Parties
Sathappan v. Income Tax Officer, Ward
Date of order
27 Mar 2014
Assessment year(s)
2004-2005
Outcome
Allowed

Case summary

In Sathappan v. Income Tax Officer, Ward, the High Court (2014) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

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

Sections referenced in this judgment

The order — as passed by the High Court

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:27.03.2014 CORAM THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN Writ Petition (MD)No.8984 of 2011andM.P.(MD).No.1 of 2012 Sathappan ... Petitioner Vs. 1. Income Tax Officer, Ward No.1(3), Arunachalam Chettiar Street, Karaikudi. 2. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle II, C.R.Buildings, VP.Rathinasamy Nadar Road, Madurai. ... Respondents Prayer:Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution ofIndia praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directingthe respondents to grant exemption under Section 10(10C) ofIncome Tax Act as requested by the petitioner (PAN No. is AVT PS5547 E) in his request dated 15.12.2006 and receipt dated27.01.2011 in respect of Assessment Year 2004-2005. For petitioner : Ms.M.RajeswariFor Respondents : Mr.R.Krishnamoorthy ORDER The issue involved in this writ petition is related tothe claim of exemption under Section 10(10C) of Income Tax Act.The petitioner, by representations dated 15.12.2006 and27.01.2011, sought exemption in respect of the Assessment Year2004-2005 which was not considered by the authority and hence heis before this Court. 2. The Income Tax Department denying the claim of thehttps://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/petitioner filed the counter affidavit stating that the requesthas not been considered since the issue is a debatable one. 2 3. On the other hand, the issue is covered by thedecision of this Court in W.P.Nos.3986 to 1997 of 2007 etc.batch, by order dated 03.11.2010 and in Writ Appeal Nos.1098 to1155 of 2011 dated 12.11.2011, wherein the Division Bench hasconsidered the similar claim and directed the respondents togrant exemption under Section 10(10C) of Income Tax Act as perthe decision of the Apex Court in S.L.P.Nos.6997 to 7002 of 2009dated 21.10.2009 and subsequently, the direction was alsocomplied. Since the petitioner is similarly placed and theprayer sought for in the writ petition also similar in nature,the writ petition is allowed and the respondents are directed togrant exemption under Section 10(10C) of the Income Tax Act andpass appropriate orders as indicated above. No costs. Sd/-Assistant Registrar(W) /True Copy/ To Sub Assistant Registrar 1. Income Tax Officer, Ward No.1(3), Arunachalam Chettiar Street,Karaikudi. 2. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle II, C.R.Buildings, VP.Rathinasamy Nadar Road,Madurai. +1cc to M/s. S.M.S.Johnny Basha Advocate Sr.No.19103/14akv AA/08.05.2014/2p- 4c/ Writ Petition(MD)No.8984 of 2011 27.03.2014
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 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