Sri A.kodanda Rami Reddy v. The Income Tax Officer, Media Ward I, Chennai – 600 034
High Court
10 Nov 2014 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · hc_cis_mas
Parties
Sri A.kodanda Rami Reddy v. The Income Tax Officer, Media Ward I, Chennai – 600 034
Date of order
10 Nov 2014
Assessment year(s)
2009-2010
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Sri A.kodanda Rami Reddy v. The Income Tax Officer, Media Ward I, Chennai – 600 034, the High Court (2014) decided the matter.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 10.11.2014
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAMW.P.Nos.33938 to 33940 of 2013
and M.P.Nos.1 of 2013 (3 MPs)
Sri A.Kodanda Rami Reddy .. Petitioner in all WPsVs.
The Income Tax Officer,Media Ward I,Chennai – 600 034. .. Respondents in all WPs
Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution ofIndia for issuance of writ of mandamus to call for the records of therespondent herein in the impugned proceedings issued under Section226(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 PAN: /2013-14 dated19.08.2013, 08.11.2013 and 08.11.2013 respectively, quash the sameand direct the respondent not to proceed further towards the recoveryof dues arising out of assessment order dated 29.12.2011 for theAssessment Year 2009-10 against which a statutory appeal and a staypetition is pending before this Court.
In all these writ petitions, the petitioner challengesthe orders dated 19.08.2013 and 08.11.2013 by which the petitionerhas been directed to remit the entire payment pursuant to the orderof assessment for the Assessment Year 2009-2010. It is an admittedfact that the petitioner's appeal before the Income Tax AppellateTribunal was rejected as against which the petitioner has filedappeal before the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court and the sameis pending. However, the case number has not been furnished in theaffidavits filed in support of these writ petitions. These writpetitions were listed for admission on 13.12.2013. Even on the saiddate, the learned Judge of this Court who heard the case neitherissued notice to the respondent nor admitted the writ petitions but
adjourned the matter to enable the petitioner to move before theHon'ble Division Bench for protection.
2. It is nearly one year since the order has been passed.Even now, the petitioner would submit that the matter is stillpending and they moved the stay petition. Since according to thepetitioner, the Hon'ble Division Bench is seized of the matter, it isfor the petitioner to approach the Hon'ble Division Bench forappropriate interim protection.
3. With the above observation, these writ petitions aredisposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected MiscellaneousPetitions are closed. Sd/-Asst. Registrar/true copy/Sub Asst. Registrar.rgrToThe Income Tax Officer,Media Ward I,Chennai – 600 034.
+3ccs to Mr.K.Vaitheeswaran,Advocate SR.No.53359
+1cc to Mr.T.Pramodkumar Chopda, Advocate SR.No.53212
W.P.Nos.33938 to 33940 of 2013
ku[co]gp/21.11
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.