Case Law Details
B. Ramamoorthy Vs Director General of Income Tax (Vigilance) (Madras High Court)
In the case of B. Ramamoorthy Vs Director General of Income Tax (Vigilance), the petitioner, B. Ramamoorthy, sought the intervention of the Madras High Court to direct the respondent, the Director General of Income Tax (Vigilance), to take appropriate action on his representation dated September 5, 2023. The representation pertained to a search and seizure operation conducted by the Director General of Income-tax (Investigation) at the residence of J. Sekar, also known as Sekar Reddy, who is associated with S. R. S. Mining.
The petitioner asserted that after the search and seizure operation, the files related to S. R. S. Mining were transferred from the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (DCIT), Non-Corporate Circle 2, Chennai, to DCIT Central Circle 2. He claimed that following this transfer, DCIT, Non-Corporate Circle 2, no longer had jurisdiction over the matter. Consequently, the petitioner lodged a complaint on September 5, 2023, which he alleged was not acted upon, leading him to file the present writ petition.
The petitioner’s counsel pointed to a communication dated September 14, 2017, that transferred the files of S. R. S. Mining. He also referenced a letter from Mr. K. G. Arun Raj, Joint Director of Income Tax (Investigation), claiming it was issued without jurisdiction. Despite the petitioner providing his Aadhar Card and confirming his complaint through a communication dated November 29, 2023, he contended that no action had been taken on his complaint, thus entitling him to the relief sought.
However, the respondent’s counsel, Mr. A. P. Srinivas, argued that the assessment proceedings for M/s. S. R. S. Mining, the firm in question, had already been concluded. He pointed out that the petitioner was a third party with no connection to the assessee or the assessment proceedings. Therefore, he argued that the writ petition should be dismissed not only because the petitioner lacked locus standi but also because neither M/s. S. R. S. Mining nor its partners had been made respondents in the petition.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
