Madras HC Upholds Order passed by Deputy Commissioner u/s 220(6) of Income Tax Act on ground of Non-appearance of Petitioner [Read Order]

The Madras High Court upheld the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner under section 220(6) of the Income Tax Act,1961 on the ground of non-appearance of the petitioner. 

Doosan power systems India Private Limited, the petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records on the file of the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax. 

R.Sivaraman, the counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has amalgamated with one Doosan Chennai Works Private Limited and that the fact of amalgamation was intimated to the department. 

It was further submitted that the department was not considering the intimation filed by the petitioner and decided the case without allowing the petitioner to present their side. Thus the assessment order passed by the Deputy Commissioner was not as per the law and was liable to be deleted. 

Prabu Mukund Arunkumar, the counsel for the department contended that rejection of the stay by the assessing officer noted that the petitioner had not appeared before the National Faceless Assessment Centre and had there been an appearance caused, the passing of adverse assessment orders could well have been avoided. 

The Court observed that since the petitioner has moved the Commissioner of Income Tax by way of stay applications, which were placed as a compilation respectively, let the petitioner pursue the same forthwith and obtain appropriate orders of stay. 

A single-member bench comprising Anita Sumanth (Judicial) directed that the stay applications, after hearing the petitioner, shall be disposed of within six weeks from the date of the current order. 

To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates