Case Law Details
Unnamalai Thiagarajan Vs CIT (Madras High Court)
In a recent judgment, the Madras High Court addressed the issue of granting sufficient time to obtain bank documents crucial for a tax case under the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and the imposition of Income-tax Act, 2015.
The petitioner, Unnamalai Thiagarajan, had filed a writ petition seeking 45 days to procure bank statements from a closed account with DBS Bank. The court noted the petitioner’s reasonable grounds, including the closure of the bank account long ago and efforts taken by the petitioner’s son in Singapore to retrieve the necessary documents.
During the proceedings, counsel for the petitioner emphasized the necessity of the additional time, fearing inadequate consideration by the first respondent. On the other hand, Mr. A. N. R. Jayaprathap, representing the respondent, acknowledged the petition’s merits.
Considering the circumstances, the Madras High Court disposed of the petition by directing the first respondent to allow the requested 45-day extension for submitting all required documents and information. The court’s decision aimed to ensure procedural fairness and allow adequate time for compliance without unnecessary hardship to the petitioner.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
An order dated 23.03.2023 was issued against the petitioner under the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and the imposition of Income-tax Act, 2015. Such order was carried in appeal by the petitioner before the first respondent.
2. The petitioner was called upon to provide documents, including bank statements relating to the petitioner’s account with DBS Bank. By stating that the said bank account was closed a along time ago and that about 45 days is required to obtain the bank statement, the present writ petition was filed.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the limited relief requested for is to grant 45 days’ time to obtain and provide the bank statement. He submits that the writ petition was filed on the reasonable apprehension that such time would not be granted by the first respondent.
4. Mr. A. N. R. Jayaprathap, learned Junior standing counsel, accepts notice for the respondent.
5. The relief requested for by the petitioner is limited to granting 45 days’ time to provide all documents called for by the first respondent. Such request is made by stating that the petitioner’s son has travelled to Singapore to obtain the statement from the DBS Bank and that this process is taking up time because the bank account was closed a long time ago. The reason set out by the petitioner appears to be reasonable.
6. Consequently, W.P.No.15357 of 2024 is disposed by directing 3/6 the first respondent to consider and grant the request for 45 days’ time to provide all documents and information requested for by the first respondent.
7. W.P.No.15357 of 2024 is disposed of on the above terms without any order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is also closed.
Author Bio
