9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2010 (2) TMI 689 - HC - Income TaxAppeal to High court - The impugned notice, dated 30.12.2009, issued by the second respondent a sum of Rs.1,15,71,391/- has been demanded as the Income Tax and the interest thereon for the assessment year 2007-2008, u/s 156 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 30.12.2009 - Against the said demand the petitioner has filed an appeal and it is pending before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals VI) - Hence,the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals VI), to dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioner, on 20.01.2010, challenging the order of assessment and the demand for the assessment year, 2007-2008, and to pass appropriate orders thereon, on merits and in accordance with law - Subject to the condition that the petitioner shall pay 1/3rd of the total amount demanded by the second respondent by his impugned notice.
Issues:
Challenging notice for Income Tax demand for Assessment Year 2007-2008. Analysis: The judgment revolves around a petition filed to challenge a notice demanding Income Tax and interest for the Assessment Year 2007-2008. The notice was issued by the Joint Commissioner of Income-tax, Salary Range IV, Chennai. The petitioner had filed an appeal against this demand, which was pending before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals VI), Chennai. The High Court directed the appellate authority to dispose of the appeal challenging the order of assessment and the demand for the said assessment year within eight weeks from the receipt of the court's order. Additionally, the petitioner was instructed to pay 1/3rd of the total amount demanded by the notice within two weeks from the receipt of the court's order. Failure to comply with this payment direction could lead to appropriate legal action against the petitioner. The judgment concludes by disposing of the writ petition without imposing any costs. It also states that connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. The court's decision focuses on ensuring the timely resolution of the appeal filed by the petitioner while emphasizing partial payment of the demanded amount as a condition for further legal proceedings.
|
