Madras High Court
N.S.B.Shankar vs The Assistant Commissioner Of Income ... on 6 December, 2024
Author: C.Saravanan
Bench: C.Saravanan
W.P.No.25713 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 06.12.2024
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN
W.P.No.25713 of 2022
N.S.B.Shankar .. Petitioner
Vs.
1. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
Non Corp Circle – 1, Income Tax Main Building
No.63, Race Course Road
Coimbatore – 624 018.
2. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals ) I
Income Tax Main Buildings
No.63, Race Course Road
Coimbatore.
3. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax – I
Income Tax Main Buildings
No.63, Race Course Road
Coimbatore.
4. The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax
Income Tax Main Buildings
No.63, Race Course Road
Coimbatore.
5. The Branch Manager
ICICI Bank, Harmony Complex 183
Diwan Bahadur Road, R.S.Puram
Coimbatore – 641 001.
6. The Branch Manager
Karur Vysya Bank, No.577
Oppanakara Street, Coimbatore.
___________
Page 1 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.25713 of 2022
7. The Branch Manager
IDBI Bank, No.72
May Flower Building Dr.Balasundaram Road
ATT Colony Gopalapuram, Coimbatore – 621 018.
8. Shri Krishna .. Respondents
Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
seeking a writ of certiorari, calling for the records of the first
respondent in impugned notice dated 23.12.2021 vide
Ref.No.ITBA/COM/F/17/2021-22/1038079034(1) and PAN
No.ALTPS4963Q for the Assessment Year 2017-18 and quash the
same.
For the Petitioner : Mr.A.S.K.Vasanth Kumar
for Ms.Kanimozhi Mathi
For the Respondents : Dr.B.Ramaswamy
Senior Standing Counsel
for R1 to R4
ORDER
The petitioner has impugned the notice dated 23.12.2021, wherein, it has been stated that despite the order being received under Section 220(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 30.08.2021, rejecting the request of the petitioner to stay the collection of tax for the Assessment Years 2017-18, 2012-13 and 2005-06, the petitioner has not paid the demand, as directed, for a sum of Rs.21,66,499/-.
___________ Page 2 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.25713 of 2022
2. The impugned communication exhorts the petitioner to remit a sum of Rs.21,69,577/-, being the arrears of tax for each of the Assessment Years, pursuant to the order dated 30.08.2021 passed under Section 220(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
3. Challenging the impugned order, on account of pendency of the appeal before the Appellate Commissioner against the respective Assessment Orders passed for the Assessment Year 2017-18, it is submitted that the impugned communication is contrary to the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of SOUL vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax1.
4.1. The respondents in the counter have stated that the petitioner has filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Coimbatore on 18.01.2020 against the Assessment Order dated 23.12.2019 passed under Section 143 (3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The stay petition filed before the Assessing 1 323 ITR 305 (Delhi High Court) ___________ Page 3 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.25713 of 2022 Officer on 19.02.2020 under Section 220(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was rejected in light of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of M/s.Karmvir Builders vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Surat & Ors.2 wherein, it has been held that merely because the petitioner has filed an appeal against the Order of Assessment, it would not amount to grant of blanket stay.
4.2. It is further submitted that the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of SOUL (supra) cannot be applied to the facts of this case, as the said case do not involve high pitched demand. It is submitted that the petitioner's case was subjected to scrutiny under CASS to verify abnormal increase in cash deposits during the period of Demonetization as compared to pre-demonetization for the Assessment Year 2017-18.
5.1. The facts on record seems to indicate that the petitioner has deposited devalued cash for a sum of Rs.1,07,70,500/-. The petitioner, having deposited such huge amount of cash, is thus, 2 Appeal (C) Nos.16670 & 16671 of 2017; dated: 28.03.2019. ___________ Page 4 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.25713 of 2022 prima facie, liable to pay tax and therefore, the petitioner cannot ask for further waiver from and above 20%, as has been ordered to be paid while rejecting the application under order dated 30.08.2021 under Section 220(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
5.2. The writ petition is liable to be dismissed and accordingly, stands dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, W.M.P.Nos.24770 and 24772 of 2022 are closed.
06.12.2024 Index : Yes/No drm ___________ Page 5 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.25713 of 2022 To
1. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Non Corp Circle – 1, Income Tax Main Building No.63, Race Course Road Coimbatore – 624 018.
2. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals ) I Income Tax Main Buildings No.63, Race Course Road Coimbatore.
3. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax – I Income Tax Main Buildings No.63, Race Course Road Coimbatore.
4. The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax Income Tax Main Buildings No.63, Race Course Road Coimbatore.
___________ Page 6 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.25713 of 2022 C.SARAVANAN,J.
(drm) W.P.No.25713 of 2022 06.12.2024 ___________ Page 7 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis