Case Law β€Ί High Court β€Ί T.ponraj v. The Commissioner, Income Tax...

T.ponraj v. The Commissioner, Income Tax Department, Tiruchendur Road, Tirunelveli – 627

High Court 29 Aug 2024 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court Β· mdubench
Parties
T.ponraj v. The Commissioner, Income Tax Department, Tiruchendur Road, Tirunelveli – 627
Date of order
29 Aug 2024
Assessment year(s)
2022-2023
Outcome
Other

The order β€” as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In T.ponraj v. The Commissioner, Income Tax Department, Tiruchendur Road, Tirunelveli – 627, the High Court (2024) decided the matter.

Summary auto-generated from the order below β€” read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

Sections referenced in this judgment

W.P.(MD)No.20022 of 2024 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 29.08.2024 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ W.P.(MD)No.20022 of 2024 andW.M.P.(MD)Nos.16981 and 16983 of 2024 T.Ponraj Vs. ... Petitioner 1.The Commissioner, Income Tax Department, Tiruchendur Road, Tirunelveli – 627 011, Tirunelveli District. 2.The Income Tax Officer, Income Tax Department, Tiruchendur Road, Tirunelveli – 627 011, Tirunelveli District. ... Respondents PRAYER:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining totheshowcauseNoticedated26.03.2024in ITBA/AST/S/156/2023-24/1063422293 (1) and show cause notice dated 13.08.2024 in ITBA/RCV/S/226(3)_1/2024-25/1067614349(1) impugned order, passed by the second respondent and quash the same as paid and illegal and consequently direct the first respondent to allow the appeal on the basis of the documents submitted by the petitioner along with material evidence available. For Petitioner : Mr.B.Charmurugan For Respondents: Mr.N.Dilip Kumar Standing Counsel O R D E R This Writ Petition is filed challenging the Demand Notice dated 26.03.2024 under Section 156 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, demanding the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.3,03,52,140/- and there is also a challenge to the notice of attachment dated 13.08.2024 issued under Section 226 (3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in respect of the above sum representing the tax dues for the assessment year 2022-2023. 2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner had filed an appeal challenging the impugned order of assessment dated 26.03.2024 and the same is stated to be pending before the Appellate Authority. The petitioner had also filed an application for stay under Section 220(6) before the Assessing Authority and the same is pending consideration. W.P.(MD)No.20022 of 2024 3. It is submitted by the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents that the stay application would be considered and orders would be passed by the second respondent in accordance with law and the same is acceded to by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 4. Recording the same, this Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the second respondent to consider the stay application filed by the petitioner and pass orders, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 29.08.2024 NCC:yes/noIndex:yes/noInternet:yes/noNsr To: 1.The Commissioner, Income Tax Department, Tiruchendur Road, Tirunelveli – 627 011, Tirunelveli District. 2.The Income Tax Officer, Income Tax Department, Tiruchendur Road, Tirunelveli – 627 011, Tirunelveli District. W.P.(MD)No.20022 of 2024 W.P.(MD)No.20022 of 2024 MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J. Nsr W.P.(MD)No.20022 of 2024 29.08.2024
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
βœ… File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) β†’ πŸ’¬ 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 β€” 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 Β· Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
Β© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP Β· LLPIN ACN-4920 Β· Jaipur, Rajasthan