DR. RAVI JUNIWAL S/O SHRI SAGAR MAL JUNIWAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
CW/10143/2023HC RajasthanRJHC02049958202309 January 2024Bench: MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA,SHUBHA MEHTA2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court declined to exercise its discretionary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The Court noted that the order under Section 148A(d) was passed on July 27, 2022, and the petitioner did not challenge it at that time. Subsequently, an assessment order was passed on May 13, 2023, against which the petitioner has filed an appeal. Since the petitioner has an alternative statutory remedy which he has already availed, the Court found no reason to interfere. The Court explicitly stated that all issues raised in the writ petition are left open to be considered in the pending appeal. The writ petition was dismissed.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Dr. Ravi Juniwal, filed a writ petition before the Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench, challenging an order passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated July 27, 2022. The assessment order was subsequently passed on May 13, 2023, and the petitioner filed an appeal against it. The writ petition was filed during the pendency of this appeal. The petitioner did not challenge the Section 148A(d) order when it was passed.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should exercise its discretion under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to interfere with the order passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, when an alternative statutory remedy of appeal is available and has been availed by the petitioner. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner has raised multiple issues in the writ petition. (Specific arguments are not detailed in the judgment). Revenue's Contention: The revenue argued that the petitioner has an alternative statutory remedy by way of appeal, which he has already availed against the assessment order. (Specific arguments are not detailed in the judgment).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148A(d)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

[2024:RJ-JP:1269-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10143/2023 Dr. Ravi Juniwal S/o Shri Sagar Mal Juniwal, Aged About 51 Years, R/o 4-Kha-18, Jawahar Nagar, Jaipur, Rajasthan- 302004. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Income Tax Officer, Ward 7(1), Jaipur, NCR Building, Statue Circle, Jaipur. 2. Union of India, Through Finance Secretary, Ministry of Finance, (Department of Revenue), Central Board of Direct Taxes, North Block, New Delhi- 110002. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Gunjan Pathak, Advocate with Mr. Kanishk Singhal, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sandeep Pathak, Advocate with Ms. Jaya P. Pathak, Advocate HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SHUBHA MEHTA Judgment / Order 09/01/2024 Though, number of issues have been raised in this petition, we find that the order under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) was passed way back on 27.07.2022 and the petitioner did not choose to challenge this order. Finally, assessment order has been passed on 13.05.2023, against which the petitioner also filed an appeal. During the pendency of the appeal, the petitioner has now filed the writ petition. In the aforesaid circumstances, when the petitioner did not take any remedy to challenge the order under Section 148A(d) of

[2024:RJ-JP:1269-DB] (2 of 2) [CW-10143/2023] the Act which was passed on 27.07.2022, we are not inclined to exercise our discretion under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to interfere with the order as the petitioner has an alternative statutory remedy which he has already availed. All the issues are left open for being considered in the pending appeal. Writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed with liberty to raise all the issues which have been raised in this appeal including all other issues on which appeal has been filed. (SHUBHA MEHTA),J (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),ACTING CJ Mohita /35

More judgments on Section 148A(d)

All 544 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148A(d) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →