Case Law › High Court › Sirajuddin Mujibur Rahman v. The Income...

Sirajuddin Mujibur Rahman v. The Income Tax Officer

High Court 15 Nov 2024 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · hc_cis_mas
Parties
Sirajuddin Mujibur Rahman v. The Income Tax Officer
Date of order
15 Nov 2024
Assessment year(s)
2017-2018, 2016-2017
Outcome
Other

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Sirajuddin Mujibur Rahman v. The Income Tax Officer, the High Court (2024) decided the matter.

Decision: This Writ Petition stands disposed of.

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 : 15.11.2024 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN W.P.No.12855 of 2022 andW.M.P.Nos.12333 and 12335 of 2022 Sirajuddin Mujibur Rahman ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The Income Tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi. 2.The Income Tax Officer, Non-Corporate Ward 10(3), Room No.613, 6[th] Floor, 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034. ... Respondents Prayer:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records on the first respondent in relating to the assessment order passed under Section 147 read with Section 144 read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961dated25.03.2022inDIN:ITBA/AST/S/147/2021- W.P.No.12855 of 2022 22/1041582131(1) for the Assessment Year 2017-2018 and quash the same. For Petitioner : Mr.T.Vasudevan For Respondents : Mr.B.Ramana Kumar Senior Standing Counsel ORDER The petitioner claims to be a non resident who failed to notice the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and therefore he suffered the impugned Assessment Order dated 25.03.2022. 2. It is the case of the petitioner is that the petitioner had stopped using the old e-mail ID. Therefore, failed to notice that earlier impugned order came to be passed on 25.03.2022. It is submitted that only when the auditor was filing the returns and finalizing the returns for the subsequent Assessment Year, the auditor noticed in the portal that the petitioner had been served notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, earlier which has culminated in the impugned order on 25.03.2022. It is submitted that the petitioner may be given one opportunity to explain the case afresh and therefore prays for setting aside the impugned order. 3. The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondents on the other hand would submit that the petitioner has not filed the returns and therefore a notice was issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which was also not replied by the petitioner and thus the impugned Assessment Order has been passed. It is further submitted that there has been Tax Deducted at Source for a sum of Rs.49,00,000/- in Form 26AS and therefore there is no mistake in the impugned order warranting an interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It is therefore submitted that the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner however confirms that the petitioner has prepared a balance sheet admitting the income of Rs.16,22,372/- for the period between 01.04.2016 and 31.03.2017 for the Assessment Year 2017-2018. Thus, the petitioner is due for the tax amount, as no tax has been remitted by the petitioner on par with the Tax Deducted at Source for the amount reflected in Form 26AS. 5. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, Court is inclined to come to the rescue of the petitioner, subject to the petitioner depositing appropriate tax that is payable on the admitted taxable income of Rs.16,22,372/-. Subject to petitioner depositing the tax within a period of 30 days from today, the impugned order will stands quashed, in which case, the respondents shall pass a fresh order on merits following the procedures prescribed under the provisional Income Tax Act. Since the dispute pertains to the Assessment Year 2016-2017, it is expected that the entire proceedings will be completed preferably within a period of 9 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that in case the petitioner fails to deposit the tax in time, the concession granted by this Court will stands automatically revoked. W.P.No.12855 of 2022 6. This Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected Writ Miscellaneous Petition is closed. 15.11.2024 Index:Yes/NoInternet:Yes/No Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order Neutral Citation : Yes/No jas W.P.No.12855 of 2022 6. This Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected Writ Miscellaneous Petition is closed. 15.11.2024 Index:Yes/NoInternet:Yes/No Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order Neutral Citation : Yes/No jas To 1.The Income Tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi. 2.The Income Tax Officer, Non-Corporate Ward 10(3), Room No.613, 6[th] Floor, 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034. C.SARAVANAN, J. W.P.No.12855 of 2022 jas W.P.No.12855 of 2022andW.M.P.Nos.12333 and 12335 of 2022 15.11.2024
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