Subramanian Deivanayagam v. The Income Tax Officer, Tds Ward, Rahmath Nagar, Maharaja Nagar, Tirunelveli-627 001
High Court
08 Oct 2020 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · mdubench
Parties
Subramanian Deivanayagam v. The Income Tax Officer, Tds Ward, Rahmath Nagar, Maharaja Nagar, Tirunelveli-627 001
Date of order
08 Oct 2020
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Subramanian Deivanayagam v. The Income Tax Officer, Tds Ward, Rahmath Nagar, Maharaja Nagar, Tirunelveli-627 001, the High Court (2020) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
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 COURTDATED: 08.10.2020CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE
W.P(MD).No.26959 of 2019
and
W.M.P.(MD).NoS.23310 to 23312 of 2019
Subramanian Deivanayagam
.. Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Income Tax Officer, TDS Ward, Rahmath Nagar, Maharaja Nagar, Tirunelveli-627 001.
2.The Centralized Processing Center, Income Tax Department, Bengaluru-560 500. Income Tax Department, Bengaluru-560 500.
3.The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), International Taxation, Income Tax Office-BSNL Tower, No.16, Greams Road, Chennai-600 006. International Taxation, Income Tax Office-BSNL Tower, No.16, Greams Road, Chennai-600 006.
4.The Centralized Processing Center, TDS, Aaykarbhawan, Sector-3, Ghaziabad-201 010. TDS, Aaykarbhawan, Sector-3, Ghaziabad-201 010.
.. Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution ofIndia for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling forthe records on the file of the second respondent in passing theimpugned order in CPC/1718/U2/1953482969-31.10.2019 dated 21.11.2019under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, quash the same asillegal, arbitrary and devoid of merit and consequently direct thefirst respondent to revise the TDS return by determining the taxdeducted at source to be under Section 195 of the Income Tax Act,1961 and further direct the second respondent to delete theadditional tax demand of Rs.5,41,51,510/-.
For Petitioner: Mr.R.SivaramanFor Respondents: Mrs.S.Srimathy Central Government Standing Counsel
ORDER
When the matter is taken up for hearing today, the learnedcounsel for the petitioner submits that the matter has now becomeinfructuous and he has also sent an E-mail to that effect to the E-mail ID mentioned in the cause list.https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
2.Recording the above submission made by the learned counselfor the petitioner as well the E-mail, this writ petition isdismissed as infructuous. No costs. Consequently, connectedmiscellaneous petitions are closed.
Assistant Registrar (CS-III)
Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)
Note: In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized forofficial purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the orderthat is presented is the correct copy, shall be theresponsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.
To
1.The Income Tax Officer, TDS Ward, Rahmath Nagar, Maharaja Nagar, Tirunelveli-627 001.
2.The Centralized Processing Center, Income Tax Department, Bengaluru-560 500.
3.The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), International Taxation, Income Tax Office-BSNL Tower, No.16, Greams Road, Chennai-600 006.
4.The Centralized Processing Center, TDS, Aaykarbhawan, Sector-3, Ghaziabad-201 010.
tsgSDS (19.10.2020) 2P-5C
https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
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.