9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (5) TMI 76X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - Dated:- 25-4-2012 - Mr.Justice Vinod K.Sharma, J. For Petitioner : Mr.K.Ravi For Respondents : Mr.Arun Kumar Joseph for Mr.J.Narayanaswamy COMMON O R D E R This judgment shall dispose of the following Writ Petitions, viz., :- Sl.No. Case No. Name of the petitioner 1 W.P.No.6608/ 2012 M/s. Sivanandha Mills Ltd., rep., by its Managing Director, Mr.P.Murugesan 2 W.P.No.6609 of 2012 " As the common question of facts are involved in both the Writ Petition, however, for the sake of brevity, facts are being taken from W.P.No.6608 of 2012. 2. The petitioner is a Company, registered under the Companies Act and has approached this Court, with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... khs Seventy one Thousand and Three hundred only). 8. The petitioner/Company, being aggrieved by the Assessment Order, preferred a Statutory Appeal with the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-I, primarily, on the ground that the Assessment Order is contrary to the settled Law that assessee is entitled to deduct the cost incurred to perfect the title of the property, and commission paid for the sale out of the capital gain. 9. Along with the Statutory Appeal, the petitioner/Company has also filed an Application for Stay of the demand. 10. The contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that, the respondent No.2 has failed to take any decision on the Appeal, as it is yet to be listed for hearing. The respondent/Depar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... attachment order. 16. The Writ Petition is opposed by the learned counsel for the respondents, contending that the Writ Petition is a premature, as the Statutory Appeal filed by the petitioner/Company is admittedly, pending with the respondent No.2. Therefore, once the petitioner has approached the Appellate Authority for the stay, it is not open to the petitioner/Company to have parallel proceedings, i.e, one before the Appellate Authority, and other before this Court. 17. The learned counsel for the petitioner controverts this stand of the learned counsel for the respondents, by contending that, all consequential orders, give independent right to the petitioner, to challenge the said orders. Therefore, this Writ Petition cannot be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
