Madras High Court
Assessment Unit vs Pallava Textiles Private Ltd on 29 October, 2025
WA No.2804 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 29.10.2025
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA,
CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.ARUL MURUGAN
Writ Appeal No.2804 of 2025
1.Assessment Unit,
Income Tax Department,
New Delhi
2.Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
Circle 1, Erode : Appellants
versus
Pallava Textiles Private Ltd,
rep. By its Director,
M.Ravichandran,
No.27-C, Sankari Bye Pass Road,
Pallipalayam 638 006 : Respondent
Prayer: Appeal filed against the order passed by learned Single Judge
in WP No.1801 of 2023 dated 30.01.2024.
For Appellants : Ms.M.Sheela,
Senior Standing Counsel,
for Income Tax Department
For Respondent : Mr.Suhrith Parthasarathy
Page 1 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/11/2025 02:27:20 pm )
WA No.2804 of 2025
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered
by the Hon'ble Chief Justice)
Challenge to the order passed by the learned Single Judge is
based primarily on the submission that as there was an alternative and
efficacious remedy of filing statutory appeal, in the absence of any
extraordinary ground made out by respondent/writ petitioner, the writ
petition ought not to have been entertained, and the respondent ought
to be remitted to exhaust his alternative remedy.
2. The other submission of the learned counsel for the appellant/
Revenue is that the findings which have been recorded by the learned
Single Judge with regard to the effective date of amalgamation,
transfer of assets and liabilities, as also the period within which the
respondent could have submitted his return, are all factual aspects
and could not be gone into in a writ petition, particularly when the
appellant in its counter-affidavit had disputed those facts. It is further
submitted that though the impugned assessment order was set aside
with liberty to issue fresh notices and make reassessment on the basis
of consolidated return of income, on the finding that while making
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/11/2025 02:27:20 pm )
assessment, consolidated return of income was not considered, the
issuance of fresh notice at this stage may be objected to by the
respondent on various technical grounds, including the ground that it
is either time barred or that issuance of fresh notice without any fresh
material may not be permissible under the scheme of the Act.
3. True, it is that the respondent had filed writ petition without
availing his statutory remedy. At the same time, we find that the
interference has been made by the learned Single Judge. Had it not
been a case of final adjudication by the learned Single Judge in the
writ petition, this Court would have definitely interfered with the
assumption of jurisdiction, as there exists an alternative statutory
remedy of filing an appeal. But we find that the main basis for
interference has been violation of statutory provisions as contained in
Section 170A of the Income Tax Act.
4. Learned Single Judge has found that the law required that
consolidated return filed by the respondent was required to be taken
into consideration while framing assessment but that was not done in
the instant case.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/11/2025 02:27:20 pm )
5. We also find that the learned Single Judge has interfered the
impugned order on the ground that reasonable opportunity was not
given to submit reply and the assessment resulted in huge additions.
6. We are of the view that the liberty which has been granted by
learned Singe Judge entitles the appellant to carry out fresh
assessment, particularly taking into view that notice under Section
143(2) of the Act which was issued on 28.06.2022, has not been set
aside but it is only the assessment order that was interfered with.
7. To make it clear, and beyond any pale of doubt, we further
clarify that it would be open for the appellant to carry out fresh
assessment by taking into consideration the consolidated return on the
basis of notice issued under Section 143(2) of the I.T. Act, issued on
28.06.2022, without there being any objection entertained on the
ground that the proceedings initiated on that basis ought to be
concluded within a particular period.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/11/2025 02:27:20 pm )
8. With the aforesaid clarification, the appeal is disposed of.
There will be no order as to costs. Consequently, CMP No.22585 of
2025 is closed.
(MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, CJ.) (G.ARUL MURUGAN, J.)
29.10.2025
Index : Yes/No
Neutral Citation : Yes/No
tar
To
1.The Assessment Unit,
Income Tax Department,
New Delhi
2.Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
Circle 1, Erode
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/11/2025 02:27:20 pm )
THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
G.ARUL MURUGAN, J.
(tar)
29.10.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/11/2025 02:27:20 pm )
