M/S DEEPAK EXTRUSIONS PVT LTD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
WP/21872/2016HC KarnatakaKAHC01027284201605 September 2017Bench: VINEET KOTHARI3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that it was not inclined to entertain the writ petitions because an alternative statutory remedy in the form of an appeal to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was available to the petitioner-assessee against the impugned assessment orders passed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Court explicitly stated that it was not making any observations on the merits or grounds raised in the petitions to avoid prejudicing the proceedings before the appellate authorities. Consequently, the writ petitions were dismissed on the ground of availability of an alternative remedy. No costs were awarded.

What were the facts?

The assessee, M/s. Deepak Extrusions Pvt. Ltd., filed two writ petitions before the High Court of Karnataka. W.P. No. 33124/2017 challenged the assessment order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax under Section 143(3) read with Sections 144 and 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2012-13, along with the consequential demand notice. W.P. No. 21872/2016 challenged a similar assessment order passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 144 of the Act for Assessment Year 2013-14, and its consequential demand notice. Both petitions sought to quash these orders and notices.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should entertain writ petitions challenging assessment orders passed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, when an alternative appellate remedy is available before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)? Assessee's Contention: The assessee, through its Senior Counsel, presented the petitions before the High Court. No specific arguments on the merits of the assessment orders were recorded in the judgment. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, represented by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, was the respondent. No specific arguments from the revenue were recorded in the judgment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 144,Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Heard together (2 matters)

W.P.No.33124/2017
W.P.No.21872/2016

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

1/3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 05th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2017

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE Dr.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI

WRIT PETITION No.33124/2017 C/W WRIT PETITION No.21872/2016 (T-IT)

BETWEEN:

M/S. DEEPAK EXTRUSIONS PVT. LTD., A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 HAVING ITS OFFICE AT: No.180/780, YERANDHALLI VILLAGE JIGANI HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK BEHIND BOMMASANDRA INDUSTRIAL AREA, BANGALORE-560058 REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR Mr. DEEPAK BETHALA S/O PRAKASH BETHALA AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS.

…PETITIONER

(COMMON)

(BY SRI. N. VENKATARAMAN, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. HARISH V.S. ADV.,)

AND:

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4) C.R. BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD BANGALORE-560001.

…RESPONDENT

(COMMON)

W.P.No.33124/2017 IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE

Date of Order 05-09-2017 W.P.No.33124/2017 c/w W.P.No.21872/2016 M/s. Deepak Extrusions Pvt. Ltd.,Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

2/3

IMPUGNED ORDER OF ASSESSMENT PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT U/S. 143(3) READ WITH SECTION 144 AND 147 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT DTD:29.12.2016, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 I.E., ANNEX-R AND THE CONSEQUENTIAL DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT IN FORM No.7 DTD:29-12-2016, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 I.E., ANNEX-S & ETC.,

W.P.No.21872/2016 IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF ASSESSMENT PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT U/S. 143(3) READ WITH SECTION 144 THE INCOME TAX ACT DTD:24.03.2016, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 I.E., ANNEX-E AND THE CONSEQUENTIAL DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT IN FORM No.7 DTD:24-03-2016, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 I.E., ANNEX-E1 & ETC.,

THESE W.Ps. COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

ORDER

Mr. N. Venkataraman, Senior Counsel for Mr. Harish V.S. Adv. for Petitioner

1.

Heard the learned Senior counsel for the petitioner-assessee.

2.

In view of the impugned order under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, being appealable before the Higher Authority namely, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), this Court is not inclined to

Date of Order 05-09-2017 W.P.No.33124/2017 c/w W.P.No.21872/2016 M/s. Deepak Extrusions Pvt. Ltd.,Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

3/3

entertain the present petition, as an alternative remedy is available to the petitioner against the impugned assessment order under Section 143(3) of the Act dated 29.12.2016 for the Assessment Year 2012-13 in W.P.No.33124/2017 and impugned assessment order under Section 143(3) of the Act dated 24.03.2016 for the Assessment Year 2013-14 in W.P.No.21872/2016.

3.

The Court is advisedly not making any observations on the merits and grounds raised before this Court, as it may adversely affect the proceedings before the Appellate Authorities created under the Income Tax Act, 1961.

4.

The writ petitions are therefore liable to be dismissed and accordingly they are dismissed. No costs.

Copy of this order be sent to the Respondents forthwith.

Sd/- JUDGE Srl.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →