Case LawHigh Court › Senthilmurugan Auto Agencies v. The Assi...

Senthilmurugan Auto Agencies v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,Circle 1 Erode

High Court 31 Jan 2022 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · hc_cis_mas
Parties
Senthilmurugan Auto Agencies v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,Circle 1 Erode
Date of order
31 Jan 2022
Assessment year(s)
2017-2018
Outcome
Other

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Senthilmurugan Auto Agencies v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,Circle 1 Erode, the High Court (2022) decided the matter.

Decision: This writ petition stands disposed of with the aboveobservations.

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

Sections referenced in this judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 31.01.2022 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN W.P.No.1186 of 2022 andW.M.P.No.1262 of 2022 (Through Video Conferencing) Senthilmurugan Auto Agencies,Represented by its Partner,Dinesh Kumar,19-D SMK Compund,Perundurai Road,Erode, Tamil Nadu - 638 011. ... Petitioner Vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,Circle 1 Erode, Flat No.R2, Nallappa Street,Periyar Nagar, Erode,Tamil Nadu - 638 001. ... Respondent Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution ofIndia, for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing therespondent to forbear from taking any steps towards the recoveryof any demand made pursuant to the assessment order dated30.12.2019 for the Assessment Year 2017-2018 for PAN:ABTFS2331Juntil disposal of the appeal filed by the petitioner by theCommissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) 3, Coimbatore. For Petitioner : Mr.Suhrith Parthasarathy For Respondent : Mr.A.N.R.Jayaprathap Junior Standing Counsel ORDER Mr.A.N.R.Jayaprathap, learned Junior Standing Counsel takesnotice on behalf of the respondent. 2. After hearing the learned for the petitioner and thelearned Junior Standing Counsel for the respondent, this writpetition is being disposed considering the fact that thepetitioner has filed an appeal against the Assessment Order https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ dated 30.12.2019 passed by the respondent for the AssessmentYear 2017-2018. 3. It is noticed that the petitioner has also filed anapplication under Section 220(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 asearly as 24.01.2020. The respondent however now issued theImpugned Notice under Section 221(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961and has called upon the petitioner to show cause as to whypenalty should not be levied against the petitioner. 4. Considering the fact that the petitioner's appeal ispending before the Appellate Commissioner and the petitioner'spetition/application under Section 220(6) of the Income Tax Act,1961 is pending before the respondent, I am inclined to disposethis writ petition by directing the respondent, to passappropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law in thepetition/application filed by the petitioner under Section 220(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 within a period of four weeksfrom the date of receipt of a copy of this order. All furtherproceedings pursuant to the Impugned Notice will be subject tofinal outcome of the order to be passed in thepetition/application filed by the petitioner under Section 220(6) of the Income Tax Act,1961. 5. This writ petition stands disposed of with the aboveobservations. No costs. Consequently, connected WritMiscellaneous Petition is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS II) //True Copy// rgm/arb Sub Assistant Registrar To The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,Circle 1 Erode,Flat No.R2, Nallappa Street,Periyar Nagar, Erode,Tamil Nadu - 638 001. +1cc to Mr.Arun karthik mohan, Advocate, S.R.No.5868+1cc to Mr.A.P.Srivas senior Standing Counsel, Advocate, S.R.No.6104 W.P.No.1186 of 2022and W.M.P.No.1262 of 2022 RK(CO)CT 28/02/2021
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