IN HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED :17.07.2019 CORAM HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR W.P.No.21166 of 2019 and W.M.P.Nos.20366 & 20368 of 2019 SRS Mining, Represented by its Partner, Mr.J.Sekar, Aged about 52 years No.312, Elite Empire, G-12, Valluvarkottam High Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 034 ..Petitioner vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2(4), No.46, M G Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 034. ..Respondent Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying to issue Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for records pertaining to impugned order in C.No.ACLFS6523P/CC 2(4)/2019- 20 dated 28.06.2019 issued by Respondent herein insofar as it forecloses right of cross examination by petitioner and consequentially direct Respondent to permit petitioner to exercise right of cross examination, and pass such further or other orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in circumstances of case and thus render justice. http://www.judis.nic.in 2 For Petitioner : Mr.Nithyaesh Nataraj for M/s.Nithyaesh and Vaibhav For Respondent : Mr.A.N.R.Jayaprathap Standing counsel ORDER Mr.Nithyaesh Nataraj, learned counsel of M/s.Nithyaesh and Vaibhav (Law Firm) on behalf of writ petitioner and Mr.A.N.R.Jayaprathap, learned Standing counsel on behalf of sole respondent are before this Court. 2. Owing to trajectory which hearing has taken today, entire writ petition now turns on very narrow compass. With consent of learned counsel on both sides, main writ petition is taken up and is being disposed of. 3. Suffice to say that subject matter of instant writ petition is scrutiny assessment qua writ petitioner for Assessment Years 2011-2012 to 2017-2018. In course of proceedings, writ petitioner sought permission to cross examine three individuals namely Shri.K.Srinivasulu, Shri.S.Nagarathinam and Shri.S.Murugesan. http://www.judis.nic.in 3 4. It is case of respondent that request for cross examination was acceded to with regard to two out of three individuals, namely Shri.S.Nagarathinam and Shri.S.Murugesan. 5. It is further case of Respondent that communication i.e., office letter dated 03.06.2019 was sent to writ petitioner, intimating writ petitioner that cross examination of said two individuals can be done on 07.06.2019 at 11.30 a.m. Thereafter, respondent has sent communication dated 28.06.2019 bearing reference C.No.ACLFS6523P/CC 2(4)/2019-20, stating that writ petitioner did not respond to 03.06.2019 communication and did not cross examine two witnesses on 07.06.2019 and therefore, request of writ petitioner for cross examination is treated as exhausted. Aggrieved by aforesaid 'communication dated 28.06.2019 bearing reference C.No.ACLFS6523P/CC 2(4)/2019-20' issued by sole respondent, [hereinafter 'impugned communication' for brevity] instant writ petition has been filed. 6. Pivotal submission of learned counsel for writ petitioner is that aforesaid communication dated 03.06.2019 was never received by writ petitioner and it was revelation of sorts for writ http://www.judis.nic.in 4 petitioner when impugned communication was received. 7. There is no material before this Court to demonstrate that communication dated 03.06.2019 was served on writ petitioner. In any event, as sole respondent has acceded to request for cross examination, this Court is of view that no prejudice would be caused, if writ petitioner is given opportunity to cross examine aforesaid two individuals on specified date. 8. To be noted, as alluded to supra in narrative thus far, writ petitioner sought permission to cross examine three individuals, but permission was accorded to cross examine two individuals. On instructions, learned Revenue counsel submits that permission was accorded with regard to two individuals as other individual namely Shri.K.Srinivasulu has turned hostile. 9. In light of narrative thus far, following order is passed: a) impugned communication dated 28.06.2019 bearing reference 'C.No.ACLFS6523P/CC 2(4)/2019-20' is set aside. To be noted, impugned communication is set http://www.judis.nic.in 5 aside solely for facilitating writ petitioner to get opportunity to cross examine and it is not set aside on merits. In other words, this Court is not expressing any view or opinion on merits of matter. b) By consent of both sides, it is now agreed that date, time and venue for cross examination of aforesaid two individuals namely Shri.S.Nagarathinam and Shri.S.Murugesan shall be 01.08.2019 (Thursday), at 12.00 Noon in office of Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Investigation Wing, Room No.111, 1st Floor, No.46, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai 34. c) It is submitted on instructions that writ petitioner's lawyer / Advocate shall cross examine aforesaid two witnesses on aforesaid date, time and venue. d) After cross examination in aforesaid manner, it is open to respondent to reissue impugned communication with regard to aspects other than cross examination aspect. http://www.judis.nic.in 6 M.SUNDAR, J. kak 10. As these directions douse anxiety of writ petitioner, this writ petition is disposed of with aforesaid directions. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 17.07.2019 kak Index:Yes/No Speaking order/Non-Speaking order To Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2(4), No.46, M G Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 034. http://www.judis.nic.in 7 W.P.No.21166 of 2019 and W.M.P.Nos.20366 & 20368 of 2019 SRS Mining v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle-2(4), Chennai