The Nimar Automobiles vs. Office Of The Income Tax Officer

PDF · subscribers
WP/9952/2022HC Madhya Pradesh04 May 2022Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SHEEL NAGU2 pages
For Petitioner: Preena SalgiaFor Respondent: Advocate General
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court declined to exercise its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The Court reasoned that since the petitioner had already availed the statutory remedy by filing an appeal under Section 246-A of the Income Tax Act against the assessment order, it was not appropriate for the High Court to interfere at this stage. The Court did not comment on the merits of the matter. The writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the appellate authorities (respondents No. 2 & 3) to consider the petitioner's appeal and any application for stay expeditiously. The principle established is that writ jurisdiction is generally not exercised when an effective alternative remedy is available and has been pursued.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, The Nimar Automobiles, through its partner Shri Animesh Humar, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur. The petition challenged a show-cause notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2013-14. During the proceedings, the Revenue informed the Court that an assessment order had already been passed pursuant to the impugned notice. The petitioner had subsequently filed an appeal under Section 246-A of the Income Tax Act against this assessment order, and the appeal was pending adjudication.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should exercise its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India when an alternative statutory remedy is available and has been availed by the petitioner? (Question of law turning on Article 226 of the Constitution of India and Section 246-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner sought directions for expeditious disposal of their pending appeal and stay application before the appellate authority. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue informed the Court that an assessment order had been passed, and the petitioner had already availed the statutory remedy by filing an appeal under Section 246-A.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 246-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SHEEL NAGU & HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANINDER S BHATTI ON THE 4th OF MAY, 2022 WRIT PETITION No. 9952 of 2022 Between:- THE NIMAR AUTOMOBILES THROUGH ITS PARTNER SHRI ANIMESH S/O SHRI NARESH CHANDRA HUMAR, RESIDING AT 98 SANTOSH NAGAR, INDORE ROAD, KHANDWA (M.P.) - 450001 .....PETITIONER (BY MS PREENA SALGIA - ADVOCATE ) AND 1. OFFICE OF THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, KHANDWA AAYKAR BHAWAN, CIVIL LINES, KHANDWA (M.P.) 2. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX RANGE-4, INDORE AAYKAR BHAWAN, OPPOSITE WHITE CHURCH ROAD, RESIDENCY AREA, INDORE (M.P.) 3. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INDORE-2, AAYKAR BHAWAN, OPPOSITE WHITE CHURCH ROAD, RESIDENCY AREA, INDORE (M.P.) 4. OFFICE OF NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DIRECTORATE OF INCOME TAX, THROUGH ASSESSING OFFICER, AAYKAR BHAWAN, SECTOR-3, VAISHALI, GHAZIABAD (U.P.) -201010 5. THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI - 110001 6. HDFC BANK LTD., HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT HDFC BANK HOUSE, SENAPATI BAPAT MARG, LOWER PAREL (W), MUMBAI (MAHARASHTRA) - 400013 .....RESPONDENTS (RESPONDENTS NO.1, 2 & 3 BY SHRI SANJAY LAL - ADVOCATE) This petition coming on for orders this day, JUSTICE SHEEL NAGU passed the following: ORDER Learned counsel for petitioner Ms Preena Salgia has filed this petition 1 (SHEEL NAGU) JUDGE (MANINDER S BHATTI) JUDGE assailing the show-cause notice issued u/S.148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 pertaining to assessment year 2013-14. 2 . During course of arguments, learned counsel for the Revenue Shri Sanjay Lal informs that pursuant to issuance of the impugned notice, assessment order has already been passed, against which the petitioner has preferred an appeal u/S.246-A of the Income Tax Act, which is pending adjudication. 3 . In view of above revelation, this Court refrains from exercising writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India since the petitioner has already availed remedy available under the statute. 4 . At this juncture, learned counsel for petitioner submits that direction for expeditious disposal of appeal and as well as application for stay in the appeal, be issued. 5 . Without commenting upon merits of the matter, this Court declining interference on merits disposes of this petition with a direction to appellate authority-respondent No.2 & 3 to consider appeal and as well as application for stay, if any, as expeditiously as possible. 6. With the above said direction, writ petition stands disposed of. DV

2 Digitally signed by DINESH VERMA Date: 2022.05.09 10:45:59 +05'30'

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →