ANNAMALAI GANESH Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr.Prabu Mukund Arun Kumar, learned Junior Standing Counsel accepts notice for R1 and Mr.ANR.Jayaprathap, learned Junior Standing Counsel accepts notice for R2. Both learned counsel have been served with a copy of the Writ Petition and its annexures and are ready to proceed with the matter finally, even at the stage of admission. Hence, by consent of both sides, this Writ Petition is disposed finally, even at this stage. Learned respondent counsel do not have much to say in the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, as recorded by me in the paragraphs to follow.

(2.) The petitioner challenges an order of assessment dated 08.12.2019 passed in terms of the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'Act') by R2, who is the Income Tax Officer at Thiruvannamalai, and the order subsequently rectifying the assessment under Section 154 on 21.07.2020 passed by the Income Tax Officer, Vellore/R1.

(3.) The sole ground raised and argued before me is that the impugned order, passed under Section 144 of the Act to the best of the Assessing Officer's judgment, greatly prejudices the petitioner. Non-appearance was on account of the fact that his father had suffered a traumatic road accident in March, 2017, which rendered him brain dead. A medical certificate dated 17.03.2016 has been issued by the Department of Neurological Sciences, Christian Medical College, Vellore certifying that, pursuant to the road accident on 02.03.2016, the petitioner's father had suffered traumatic brain injury and there has been neurological damage caused, associated with loss of memory. The discharge summary is dated 01.08.2017 and the petitioner states that his father is being taken care at home, though in a vegetative state. He would only pray that he be granted one more opportunity to appear before the Assessing Officer and make his submissions.