Loading...

A.Vijayaka vs The Commissioner Of Income Tax … on 28 January, 2010

Madras High Court
A.Vijayaka vs The Commissioner Of Income Tax … on 28 January, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED   28.01.2010

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN

W.P. Nos.23065 and 23068 OF 2009
and
M.P.Nos.1 and 1 of 2009


A.Vijayaka			... Petitioner in W.P.No.23065 of 2009

V.Premalatha		... Petitioner in W.P.No.23068 of 2009

Versus

1.The Commissioner of Income Tax Central I,
   New No.46, Old No.108, M.G.Road,
   Nungambakkam,
   Chennai  600 034.

2.The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals I),
   New No.46, Old No.108, M.G.Road,
   Nungambakkam,
   Chennai  600 034.

3.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
   Central Circle I (2)
   New No.46, Old No.108, M.G.Road,
   Nungambakkam,
   Chennai  600 034.		..	Respondents in W.P.Nos.23065 						   and 23068 of 2009

PRAYER IN W.P.NO.23065 OF 2009: Writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the first respondent in C No.1571/49-55/C-I/2009-10 and to quash the order dated 06.10.2009 and direct the first respondent to grant absolute and unconditional stay of collection of tax demand and interest relating to the assessment years 2001-02 to 2007-08 pending disposal of the appeals before the second respondent.

PRAYER IN W.P.NO.23068 OF 2009: Writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the first respondent in C No.1571/35-41/C-I/2009-10 and to quash the order dated 07.10.2009 and direct the first respondent to grant absolute and unconditional stay of collection of tax demand and interest relating to the assessment years 2001-02 to 2007-08 pending disposal of the appeals before the second respondent.

	 		For Petitioners   	  :  Mr.P.Rameshkumar

			For Respondents	  :  Mr.K.Subramanian

					* * * * *		
				  
COMMON ORDER

Today, when these writ petitions were taken up for hearing, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners have submitted that these writ petitions have become infructuous. He has also made an endorsement to that effect.

2. Based on the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and in view of the endorsement made, these writ petitions are dismissed as infructuous. No costs.

arr

To

1.The Commissioner of Income Tax Central I,
New No.46, Old No.108, M.G.Road,
Nungambakkam,
Chennai 600 034.

2.The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals I),
New No.46, Old No.108, M.G.Road,
Nungambakkam,
Chennai 600 034.

3.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
Central Circle I (2)
New No.46, Old No.108, M.G.Road,
Nungambakkam,
Chennai 600 034

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. More Information