Madras High Court
M/S.Tamil Nadu Mercantile Bank Limited vs / on 26 April, 2024
Author: C.Saravanan
Bench: C.Saravanan
W.P.(MD) No.10252 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 26.04.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN
W.P.(MD) No.10252 of 2024
and
W.M.P.(MD) Nos.9220, 9222, 9227 and 9228 of 2024
M/s.Tamil Nadu Mercantile Bank Limited,
rep. by its Managing Director,
No.57, Victoria Extension Road,
Tuticorin 628 002. ... Petitioner
/vs./
1.The Assessment Unit,
Income Tax Department,
National e-Assessment Centre,
Delhi E-Ramp,
Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium,
Delhi 110 003.
2.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
Circle -1, Tirunelveli,
Income Tax Department,
Rahmath Nagar,
Tiruchendur Road,
Tirunelveli 627 001.
3.The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax – 1,
Madurai,
1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.10252 of 2024
Income Tax Department,
Madurai,
Tamil Nadu 625 002. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for
issuance of Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records of the Writ Petitioner on the
file of the 1st Respondent to quash the impugned order u/s 143(3) read with
section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 29.03.2024 in DIN -
ITBA/AST/S/143(3)/2023-24/1063623923(1) for the Assessment Year 2022-23.
For Petitioner : Mr.A.S.Sriraman
For Respondents : Mr.J.Parekh Kumar
Senior Standing Counsel
ORDER
Mr.J.Parekh Kumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel takes notice for the respondents.
2.This Writ Petition has been filed for a Writ of Certiorari to quash the order passed by the first respondent dated 29.03.2024 in DIN- ITBA/AST/S/143(3)/2023-24/1063623923(1).
2/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) No.10252 of 2024
3.The petitioner had filed regular return of income and thereafter, the petitioner's case was selected for complete scrutiny under the CASS selection. This has lead to issuance of serving notices to the petitioner. Ultimately, the Department issued a show cause notice dated 22.03.2024 asking the petitioner to respond by 24.03.2024.
4.The petitioner however failed to respond to it immediately. Instead, on 26.03.2024, the petitioner attempted to log in for a personal hearing, which was rejected in the portal and thus, the impugned order has been passed, whereby the petitioner has been asked to deposit differential tax of Rs.1,10,03,88,297/-.
5.The learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that the impugned order has been passed in violation of principles of naturals of justice and therefore, he seeks one opportunity for the case to be re-heard. The petitioner undertakes to furnish all the documents that are required for completing the assessment.
3/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) No.10252 of 2024
6.On the other hand, the learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondents would submit that the impugned order does not warrant any interference. It is submitted that the petitioner has an opportunity to file an appeal under Section 246A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
7.That apart, the learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondents would submit that sufficient opportunity was given to the petitioner. Even prior to the issuance of show cause notice dated 22.03.2024, notices were issued to the petitioner, wherein the petitioner was asked to furnish the documents. However, the petitioner failed to provide the same and therefore, there is no merit in the challenge to the impugned order.
8.Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondents, I am of the view that the first respondent has passed the impugned order in a hurried manner, as the assessment would get time barred, in view of the limitation prescribed under Section 153 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) No.10252 of 2024
9.Therefore, to balance the interest of the petitioner and the respondents, I am inclined to set aside the impugned order and remit the case back to the first respondent to pass a fresh order on merits and in accordance with law within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order subject to the petitioner furnishing all the information that were called for by the first respondent and the petitioner giving the reply to the show cause notice dated 22.03.2024 within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
10.It is made clear that the impugned order, which stands quashed, shall be treated as corrigendum to the show cause notice dated 22.03.2024 issued to the petitioner. The reply to be filed by the petitioner within such time shall be a detailed reply, failing which the first respondent is at liberty to re-confirm the demand that has been confirmed in the impugned order. 5/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) No.10252 of 2024
11.The Writ Petition stands allowed, accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
Index : Yes / No 26.04.2024
Internet : Yes / No
mm
6/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.10252 of 2024
C.SARAVANAN, J.
mm
W.P.(MD) No.10252 of 2024
26.04.2024
7/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis