Madras High Court
Aa37 Kudumiyampalayam Primary vs The Principal Commissioner Of Income ... on 13 June, 2025
Author: Krishnan Ramasamy
Bench: Krishnan Ramasamy
W.P.No.16051 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 13.06.2025
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY
W.P.No.16051 of 2025
and
W.M.P.Nos.18162 & 18165 of 2025
AA37 Kudumiyampalayam Primary
Agricultural Co-Op Bank Ltd.
Rep. by its Secretary,
Kudumiyampalayam A.Anumanpalli (Post)
Arachalur Via Erode Taluk
Erode – 638101
PAN : AAFAA3195E ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax,
Coimbatore-1,
REAC, Coimbatore,
Tamilnadu.
2. Assessment Unit,
Income Tax Department,
Ministry of Finance,
New Delhi. ... Respondents
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of the 2 nd respondent
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 19/06/2025 04:05:22 pm )
W.P.No.16051 of 2025
in PAN : AAAJA0895K passed U/s 147 r/w 144 dated 29.09.2023 in
DIN:ITBA/AST/S/147/2023-24/1056663860(1) and the consequential
order U/s 264 dated 24.09.2024 passed by the 1st respondent in
DIN:ITBA/REV/F/REV7/2024-25/1069030708(1) for the AY 2018-19
under the surrendered PAN: AAAJA0895K and quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.G.Vardini Karthik
For Respondents : Dr.B.Ramaswamy
Senior Standing Counsel
ORDER
Heard Mr.G.Vardini Karthik, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner and Dr.B.Ramaswamy, learned Senior Standing Counsel
appearing for the respondents.
2. The challenge in this Writ Petition is made against the
Impugned Assessment Order dated 29.09.2023 passed by the 2nd
respondent and consequential order dated 24.09.2024 passed by the 1st
respondent, pertaining to the assessment year 2018-19.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, in the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 19/06/2025 04:05:22 pm )
present case, originally return was filed on 17.02.2019 for the assessment
year 2018-19. Earlier, the petitioner had one PAN Number, which was
wrongly issued under the status of "Non Juridical Person". Subsequently,
the petitioner applied for another PAN Number, which was rightly issued
under the status of "Society". Due to change of PAN Number, the
petitioner was not aware of the notices issued in the Old PAN Number
and therefore, the petitioner did not file any reply to the notices and
participate in the proceedings. However, without hearing it, the 2nd
respondent has passed the impugned assessment order dated 29.09.2023.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that,
as against the impugned order of assessment, the petitioner filed a
petition under Section 264 before the 1st respondent. However, the same
was rejected on the ground that, the petitioner had failed to participate in
the proceedings and provide suitable reply before the Assessing Officer,
hence, the petition under Section 264 cannot be considered.
5. The Learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the
respondents would submit that, initially, the petitioner had one PAN
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 19/06/2025 04:05:22 pm )
Number in the name of its Trust and subsequently, the Trust was
converted into a Society and therefore, a new PAN Number was issued to
the petitioner. However, the petitioner had all the transactions in the Old
PAN Number i.e. in the name of Trust. Hence, the respondent had used
Old PAN Number to all the transactions.
6. Further, the Learned Senior Standing Counsel would submit
that, when the petitioner has claimed that, they have been regularly filing
return of income under New PAN Number from the Assessment Year
2015-16, none of the documents were produced before the Assessing
Officer to prove the said fact, hence, the petition under Section 264 was
rejected by the Assessing Officer. However, the Learned Senior Standing
Counsel would fairly submit that, in the event, the petitioner is ready to
deposit the amount of cost which is to be fixed by this Court, the prayer
sought for by the petitioner may be considered with heavy cost.
7. I have given due consideration to the submissions made on
either side and perused the materials available on record.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 19/06/2025 04:05:22 pm )
8. In the present case, the petition under Section 264 was rejected
for the reason that, the petitioner had failed to file any reply or produce
any documentary evidences to demonstrate the case before the Assessing
Officer. The reason given by the petitioner for not participating in the
assessment proceedings was because of change in the name of the
Management. According to the petitioner, due to change in the name of
the management of the society, the notices were served in the Old PAN
Number instead of New PAN Number, hence, he was not aware of the
notices and therefore, he could not participate in the proceedings.
9. This Court is of the considered opinion that, merely because of
non participation of the assessment proceedings, the valuable right of the
petitioner would not be deprived of to prosecute a case under Section
264. Initially, the petitioner's society had been registered as a Trust and
subsequently, it has been converted into a society. So therefore, some
practical difficulties were aroused in the management of the society, due
to the change in the name of the management. Considering this aspect, in
the interest of justice, to give one more opportunity to the petitioner, this
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 19/06/2025 04:05:22 pm )
Court is inclined to set aside the impugned order passed under Section
264 along with the best judgment assessment order passed under Section
147 and remand the matter to the Assessing Officer / 2nd respondent for
fresh consideration.
10. Accordingly, this Court is inclined to pass the following
orders/directions:-
(i) The impugned order dated 29.09.2023 passed by the 2nd
respondent, and consequential order dated 24.09.2024 passed by the 1st
respondent, are hereby set aside.
(ii) Consequently, the matter is remanded to the 2nd respondent /
Assessing Officer, for fresh consideration.
(iii) While remanding the matter, it is made clear that, the
impugned order is set aside subject to payment of cost of Rs.10,000/- to
the Principal Government Naturopathy Medical College and Hospital,
Account No.7883022723, IFSC Code: IDIB000M157, and the same shall
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 19/06/2025 04:05:22 pm )
be paid by the petitioner, within a period of two weeks from the date of
receipt of a copy of this order.
(iv) Upon making of such payment, the petitioner shall file a reply
along with supportive documents within a period of four weeks, and
(v) On receipt of the reply from the petitioner, the 2nd respondent /
Assessing Officer shall afford an opportunity of personal hearing to the
petitioner by issuing appropriate notice to the petitioner and thereafter, to
decide the matter in accordance with law.
11. In the result, this Writ Petition stands allowed on the aforesaid
terms. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. No
costs.
13.06.2025
raja
Index : yes/no
Internet : yes/no
Speaking Order / Non-Speaking Order
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 19/06/2025 04:05:22 pm )
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J.
raja
To
1. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax,
Coimbatore-1,
REAC, Coimbatore,
Tamilnadu.
2. The Assessment Unit,
Income Tax Department,
Ministry of Finance,
New Delhi.
13.06.2025
(2/2)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 19/06/2025 04:05:22 pm )
