Case Details

Citation(s)
2008 SLG 4017 2008 SLD 4017 (2008) 302 ITR 40
Madras High Court
WRIT APPEAL No. 827 OF 2007 AND M. P. No. 1 OF 2007 FEBRUARY 5, 2008
P.D. DINAKARAN AND R. REGUPATHI, JJ.

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

M. Pirai Choodi

v.

Income Tax Officer

Law:

Section:

Section 256 of Income-tax Act, 1961 - High Court - Reference to Where assessee was not given opportunity to examine third party on whose statement revenue had placed reliance, as there was violation of principles of natural justice assessee's writ could not be dismissed on ground of availability of alternative remedy [A.Y. 2004-05]. It is general rule that it may not be proper to entertain the writ petitions when effective alternative remedy by way of statutory appeal is available. But the above general rule is subject to exceptions. According to the appellant/writ petitioner/assessee, in spite of the documentary evidence furnished to substantiate the agricultural income to the tune of Rs. 11,32,232.42 for the assessment year 2004-05, the respondent/assessing authority had chosen to overlook the same and refused to admit the said agricultural income for the assessment year 2004-05 merely based on a statement alleged to have been obtained from the Village Administrative Officer behind the back of the appellant/writ petitioner/assessee. However, the assessee's writ was dismissed by the Single Judge on the ground of alternative remedy. Held that the appellant/writ petitioner/assessee was not present when the statement of the Village Administrative Officer was obtained by the assessing authority. There was some force in the contention of the appellant/writ petitioner/assessee that such a statement obtained from the Village Administrative Officer behind the back of the appellant/writ petitioner / assessee depriving him an opportunity to cross-examine the Village Administrative Officer would amount to violation of the principles of natural justice and, therefore, would vitiate the assessment order. Hence, there was a glaring violation to the principles of natural justice apparent on the face of the records which fact was not properly appreciated by the Single Judge while dismissing the writ petition on the ground of alternative remedy. Thus, the writ appeal was to be allowed. T. Ayyasamy for the Appellant. Naresh Kumar for the Respondent. JUDGMENT P.D. Dinakaran, J.-The unsuccessful writ petitioner has preferred the above writ appeal against the order of the learned…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492