If the arears of tax is not paid by the person who are having interests in the properties of the late J .Jayalalitha, then the department will proceed against the property by bringing the property into auction as per the procedure contemplated under the Income Tax Act.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF MADRAS
(SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION)
W.P.No. 38696 of 2025
J. Deepa
D/ o Jaykumar
Old No.9, New No. 13,
Sivagnanam Street, T. Nagar,
Chennai – 600 017 Petitioner
vs
1. Tax Recovery Officer
TRO Central -2 Chennai Room No 119, 1 st Floor
Investigation Building
No. 46 (Old No. 108) Mahatma Gandhi Road Chennai- 600 034
2. J. Deepak,
S/ o Jayakumar,
No. 13, Sivagnanam Street,
T.Nagar,
Chennai – 600017. Respondents
COUNTER AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE 1 st RESPONDENT
I, S. Ashok Kumar, S/ o N. Santhalingam, Hindu, aged about 56 years, presently serving as the Tax Recovery officer, Central – 2, Income Tax Buildings, Nungambakkam, Chennai — 600 034, do hereby solemnly affirm and sincerely state as follows.
Page No: I Corrns:
121 o
1. I subnft that I the first h crcin and f arn authorisccl to file this counter herein and I a m aware O f thc facts of thc casc as borne out fron’l the records availablc in this office.
2. I submit that I have read thc affidavit filed by the Petitioner in the above Writ Petition and I deny all the allegations and averments contained therein except those that are s pecifically admitted herein.
3. I submit that the Income Tax Assessments of the deceased
assessee, Late. Selvi J. Jayalalitha (hereinafter referred as the deceased assessee) with PAN: AAFPJ8986K, for the A.YS. 1990-91 to 2011-12 resulted in tax demand and interest u/ s 220(2) amounting to Rs.36,56,95,956/-. Tax Recovery certificate u/ s 222 of the IT Act had been drawn for recovery of Rs. 36,56,95,956/- for the A. Y 1991-92 to
2011-12 and ITCP-I dated 08.02.2007 had been issued.
4. I submit that a letter dated 23.07.2025 was issued from this office to the petitioner, stating that it is requested to make the payment of outstanding dues and submit the challan on or before 30.07.2025 failure which coercive action like auction for sale proceedings against attached immovable properties or issuance of Summons u/ r 83 of the
IT Act etc. will be initiated as per Second Schedule of Income Tax Act, 1961. It is to be noted here that letter dated 23.07.2025 was just a reminder to make outstanding dues w.r.t. the ITCP— 1 along with notice
Corrns:
034
131
of demand scrvcd to the asscssce on It had been almost
two dccades from the clatc of issuc Of ITCP¯ 1 and hence this reminder does not require any notice of demand and not bounded by 15 days’ time limit as no fresh certificate u/ s 222 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, has been drawn.
5. In continuation to the above letter, a detailed communication dated 04.08.2025, the demand Of Rs• both under
Income Tax and Wealth Tax assessments has been communicated to the petitioner J.Deepa and the 2nd respondent J.Deepak.
6. As per the provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961, no time barring date applies to the recovery of demand once it has been raised. Hence, petitioner’s claim that the ITCP — 1 has been issued and Certificate u/ s 222 has been drawn way back in 8th February, 2007, is baseless.
I submit that the latest demand position as per the ITBA system is provided by the assessing officer of Late J. Jayalaithaa, i.e., Deputy
Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2(2), Chennai vide letter dt. 30.12.2025 and as per the said letter the demand under Income Tax is Rs. 8,09,36,856/- and Wealth Tax Assessments is Rs. 9, 12,60,693/and the details are as follows.
Page No: 3 Corrns:
Demand under Income Tax :
Demand (in Rs.)
1991-92
1995-96
1999-00
2001-02
2004-05
40, 50,948
2005-06
2006-07
TOTAL
Demand under Wealth Tax :-
S.
Page No: 4 Corrns: qtr a&r€r
151
5003-04
38914,778
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
47 , 39 , 884
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
49
2012-13
2015-16
1,57 ,880
TOTAL
The Income Tax demand as per ITBA inclusive of Tax and Rule V interest as on 31.01.2026 is Rs.9,OO,17,962/- and wealth Tax is Rs. Further Rule 5 interest is applicable in the
recovery proceedings till the date of payment.
8. I submit that as per section 159 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the liabilities of the deceased assessee is to be discharged by the Legal Representative to the extent to which the deceased assessee•s estate is capable of meeting the liability.
Page No: 5 Corrns:
161
9. I sublüit that the abovc writ pctition filccl against the intimation of arrears is not maintainable. By intimating the arrears, the petitioner is no way prejudiced and he cannot be C Onsidered as aggrieved person. Imrther the petitioner has not filed any reply or objections to the Tax due intimation letters dt. 13.07.2025 and 04.082025. The Tax dues of late J.Jaylaiathaa was provided to the writ petitioner J.Deepa and
2nd respondent J.Deepak on various proceedings and occasions and J.Deepa and J.Deepak were well informed by the Tax arrears by the Respondent herein and notices were given in wealth tax assessments. The writ petitioner and the 2nd respondent who are well aware of the wealth tax assessments, curiously pleads ignorance of
the Tax demands. In the writ petitions W.P.Nos. 9285 and 10135 of 2020 filed by J.Deepa and J.Deepak, challenging the land acquisition proceedings from converting the residential house “Veda Nilayam” at Poes Garden, Chennai, into a memorial, the Hon’ ble Court vide order dt.24.11.2021 permitted the Income Tax Department to proceed for recovering any arrears of tax payable by Ms Jayalalithaa which is chargeable on her estate as per law. J.Deepak and the Writ petitioner J.Deepa after getting the Estate of Ms J.Jayalalithaa, ought to have paid the Tax dues, but they are filing writ petition after writ petition, even against tax due intimation letters.
Page No: 6 Corrns:
Chennai-600
171
10. I subniit that another legal rcprcscntativc Of Late JJayalaithaa, namely J.Deepak through his authorizccl representative vide letter
sought for extension of time for paying the Tax arrears.
He filed another letter dc. 14.10.2025 and sought for permission to pay the outstanding amount in instalments• Accordingly, the department vide letter dt. 16.10.2025 asked J.Deepak to pay a sum of
– in 6 equal monthly installments commencing from
October 2025 to March 2026. However, Shri J.Deepak has paid a sum ofRs. on 15.10.2025 & 15.11.2025 and out of the same,
were wrongly paid in his PAN number (PAN:
AFUPD6100K), instead of paying the same in the PAN ANUmbéh- of the
Late J.Jayalaithaa and inspite of the letters issued by the department to correct the PAN number in the challan, J.Deepak has not corrected the same so far.
11. I submit that the attachment of the property was done during the life time of the assessee, Late J.Jayalalithaa. If the arears of tax is not paid by the person who are having interests in the properties of the late
J .Jayalalitha, then the department will proceed against the property by bringing the property into auction as per the procedure contemplated under the Income Tax Act.
For all the reasons stated above, the respondent pray that this Hon ‘ble Court may be pleased to dismiss the above writ petition and
Page No: 7 Corrns:
t%-21 Ct,ennd-600
18/
pass such further or other ordcrs as this Hon ‘blc Court rnay deem fit and proper in the circurnstancc Of thc casc and thus render justice.
Solemnly affirrncd at Chennai Before Me on this 4 th day of February’ 2026 and signed his name in my presence
Advocate: Chennai
GAURAV KAI-RA
Income /Central-1, Tax Officer O*/Chennai(HQ) S. *Gr0 ASHOK / Tax KUMARRecovery Officer
Central-2, 034 / Chennai-600 034
Page No: 8 Corrns:
