Palapandi Shanthi Priya V. Income Tax Officer

WA(MD)/980/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the appellant, Palpandi Shanthi Priya, against the order of the Income Tax Officer, which was challenged in a writ petition. The appellant argued that the assessment order was cryptic, non-speaking, and did not consider the explanations provided for a substantial cash deposit. The learned single Judge had previously declined to interfere, citing the availability of a statutory remedy. However, the appellant contended that the statutory remedy was not efficacious and that the order was a result of non-application of mind. The High Court found that the explanation dated 30.11.2024 was crucial and had been overlooked, leading to the decision to set aside the previous order and remand the case for re-evaluation.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 761512 (HC-MISC)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 16-04-2025
• Assessment Year: misc
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: RAJESWARI
• Assessee Lawyers: N MUTHU
• Keywords: Assessment Order; Cryptic order; Extraordinary jurisdiction; Income Tax; Non-speaking order; Statutory remedy

Judgement Text

"W.A.(MD)No.980 of 2025 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 16.04.2025 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN AND THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.POORNIMA W.A.(MD).No.980 of 2025 and C.M.P.(MD).No.6230 of 2025 Palpandi Shanthi Priya Old No.5A, New No.21, B.B. Road, Venkatachalapuram, Madurai – 625 011, : Appellant Vs. 1.Income Tax Officer, Non Corp. Ward 1(3) Madurai, Income Tax Office – Madurai MA No.2, V.P. Rathinasamy Nadar Road, CR Building, Bibikulam, Madurai, Tamil Nadu 625 002. 2.Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department, New Delhi. : Respondents PRAYER: Writ Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent to set aside the order dated 27.02.2025 passed in W.P.(MD) No.3924 of 2025. For Appellant : Mr.N.Sudalai Muthu For Respondents : Mr.Rajeswari Senior Standing Counsel *** 1/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.(MD)No.980 of 2025 JUDGMENT DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN,J. and R.POORNIMA ,J. The appellant herein, an income tax assessee who suffered an assessment order dated 08.01.2025, had filed the writ petition, stating that the order of the Income Tax Officer is bereft of details, non-speaking, and cryptic, without considering the representation and the explanation given by the assessee on 30.11.2024. The learned single Judge, however, thought it fit that when there is a statutory remedy available under the Act, the extraordinary jurisdiction of the High Court need not be interfered with. Being aggrieved, the present writ appeal is filed on the ground that though there is a statutory remedy, it is not efficacious. Furthermore, the order impugned in the writ petition is ex facie, improper, illegal, and a brownout of non-application of mind, and hence, the learned single Judge ought to have entertained this writ petition. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner took us to the impugned order passed by the Income Tax Officer and demonstrated that the impugned order dated 08.01.2025 is in breach of discussion and any reference about the explanation given by the assessee on 30.11.2024. 2/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.(MD)No.980 of 2025 3. This Court finds that the verdict extract of the explanation given by the assessee on 12.09.2024 alone is in the assessment order, and there is no reference or discussion about the explanation given by the assessee on 30.11.2024. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner's explanation dated 30.11.2024 contains the source of the cash deposit to the tune of Rs.70,26,887/- in the bank account, and if the assessing officer had gone through that explanation, he would not have arrived at the conclusion that the assessee has failed to substantiate the sources. This Court finds that the omission to consider the explanation dated 30.11.2024 goes to the root of the assessment order and makes it defective. Hence, it is appropriate to set aside the order of the learned single Judge dated 08.01.2025. The matter is remanded back to the second respondent to consider the explanation dated 30.11.2024 and pass an appropriate order in accordance with law within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 4. This Writ Appeal is disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. (G.J., J.) (R.P., J.) skn 16.04.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes 3/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.(MD)No.980 of 2025 To 1.Income Tax Officer, Non Corp. Ward 1(3) Madurai, Income Tax Office – Madurai MA No.2, V.P. Rathinasamy Nadar Road, CR Building, Bibikulam, Madurai, Tamil Nadu 625 002. 2.Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department, New Delhi. 4/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.(MD)No.980 of 2025 DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN,J. and R.POORNIMA, J. skn W.A.(MD).No.980 of 2025 and C.M.P.(MD).No.6230 of 2025 16.04.2025 5/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis "