Case LawHigh Court › Unnamalai Thiagarajan v. Commissioner Of...

Unnamalai Thiagarajan v. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-18 Room

High Court 14 Jun 2024 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · hc_cis_mas
Parties
Unnamalai Thiagarajan v. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-18 Room
Date of order
14 Jun 2024
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Unnamalai Thiagarajan v. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-18 Room, the High Court (2024) decided the matter.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
W.P.No.15357 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 14.06.2024 CORAM : THE HON'BLEMR.JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY W.P.No.15357 of 2024 andW.M.P.No.16681 of 2024 Unnamalai Thiagarajan ... Petitioner Versus 1. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-18 Room No.46, New Building III Floor, Investigation Building, No.46 (Old No.108), Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai-600 034. 2. Deputy Director of Income Tax (Investigation) Unit 3(1), Investigation Building, No.46 (Old No.108), Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai-600 034. ...Respondents Prayer : A Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1[st] Respondent to consider the Petitioner's request for extension of time dated 04.06.2024 1/6 W.P.No.15357 of 2024 and grant the Petitioner 45 days' time to obtain and furnish all requisite documents/details. For Petitioner: Mr. Suhrith Parthasarathy For Respondent:Mr. A.N.R.JayaprathapJunior Standing Counsel ORDER An order dated 23.03.2023 was issued against the petitioner under the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and the imposition of Income-tax Act, 2015. Such order was carried in appeal by the petitioner before the first respondent. 2. The petitioner was called upon to provide documents, including bank statements relating to the petitioner's account with DBS Bank. By stating that the said bank account was closed a along time ago and that about 45 days is required to obtain the bank statement, the present writ petition was filed. 2/6 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the limited relief requested for is to grant 45 days' time to obtain and provide the bank statement. He submits that the writ petition was filed on the reasonable apprehension that such time would not be granted by the first respondent. 4. Mr.A.N.R.Jayaprathap, learned Junior standing counsel, accepts notice for the respondent. 5. The relief requested for by the petitioner is limited to granting 45 days' time to provide all documents called for by the first respondent. Such request is made by stating that the petitioner's son has travelled to Singapore to obtain the statement from the DBS Bank and that this process is taking up time because the bank account was closed a long time ago. The reason set out by the petitioner appears to be reasonable. 6. Consequently, W.P.No.15357 of 2024 is disposed by directing 3/6 W.P.No.15357 of 2024 the first respondent to consider and grant the request for 45 days' time to provide all documents and information requested for by the first respondent. 7. W.P.No.15357 of 2024 is disposed of on the above terms without any order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is also closed. 14.06.2024 Index : Yes /NoSpeaking Order : Yes /NoNeutral Case Citation: Yes /No kal 4/6 To 1. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-18 Room No.46, New Building III Floor, Investigation Building, No.46 (Old No.108), Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai-600 034. 2. Deputy Director of Income Tax (Investigation) Unit 3(1), Investigation Building, No.46 (Old No.108), Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai-600 034. 5/6 6/6 W.P.No.15357 of 2024 SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY,J.kal W.P.No.15357 of 2024 andW.M.P.No.16681 of 2024 14.06.2024
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