Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF MARCH, 2018
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA
WRIT PETITION No.43194/2015 (T-IT)
C/W WP No.43195/2015, WP No.46036/2015
In WP No. 43194/2015
BETWEEN:
Viren Rashmikanth Mehta S/o Rashmikanth Mehta, Aged about 55 years, Residing at No.29/A Shanthappa Lane, S.J.P. Road Cross, Bengaluru – 560 002.
….Petitioner (By Sri. Pradeep Kumar, Advocate for Sri. Harish V. S., Advocate)
AND:
Income Tax Officer, Ward 5(2), Unity Building Annexe, 6th Floor, Mission Road, Bengaluru – 560 027.
….Respondent (By Sri. K. V. Aravind, Advocate)
This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the impugned assessment order passed by the respondent under Section 147 read with Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act 1961, dated 24.03.2014 for the assessment year 2006-07 i.e.,
Annexure-B and consequential notice of demand issued by the respondent in Form-7, dated 24.03.2014 for the assessment year 2006-07 i.e., Annexure-C and etc,.
In WP No. 43195/2015
BETWEEN:
Viren Rashmikanth Mehta (HUF) S/o Rashmikanth Mehta, Aged about 55 years, Residing at No.29/A Shanthappa Lane, S.J.P. Road Cross, Bengaluru – 560 002.
….Petitioner (By Sri. Pradeep Kumar, Advocate for Sri. Harish V. S., Advocate)
AND:
Income Tax Officer, Ward 5(2), Unity Building Annexe, 6th Floor, Mission Road, Bengaluru – 560 027.
….Respondent (By Sri. K. V. Aravind, Advocate)
This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the impugned assessment order passed by the respondent under Section 147 read with Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act 1961, dated 24.03.2014 for the assessment year 2006-07 i.e., Annexure-B and consequential notice of demand issued by the respondent in Form-7, dated 24.03.2014 for the assessment year 2006-07 i.e., Annexure-C and etc.,
In WP No. 46036/2015
BETWEEN:
Late. Haridas C. Ashar (HUF) Bengaluru
Since Deceased Represented by its Legal Heirs
Hiren H. Ashar S/o Late. Haridas C Ashar, Aged about 49 years, Residing at: No. 386/A, 7th Cross, 6th Phase, 1st Stage, Shivanagar, Bengaluru - 560 044.
Suhil H. Ashar S/o Late Haridas C Ashar Age about 45 years Residing at: F-303, Marigold Block, ETA Gardens, Near Binny Mills, Magadi Road, Bengaluru - 560 023.
….Petitioners (By Sri. Pradeep Kumar, Advocate, for Sri. Harish V. S., Advocate)
AND:
Income Tax Officer Ward 8(3), Jeevan Sampige Building, No. 1, Sampige Road, Malleshwaram, Bengaluru - 560 003.
….Respondent
(By Sri. K. V. Aravind, Advocate)
This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the impugned assessment order passed by the respondent under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961,
dated 31.10.2014 for the assessment year 2007-08 i.e., Annexure-E and consequential notice of demand issued by the respondent, dated 31.10.2014 for the assessment year 2007-08, i.e., Annexure-F and etc.,
These writ petitions coming on for Preliminary Hearing in ‘B’ Group, this day, the court made the following:
ORDER
Petitioners have called in question the legality and correctness of the impugned assessment order passed by the respondent under Section 147 read with Section 143 (3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ for short) dated 24.03.2014 relating to the assessment year 2006-2007 and consequential notice of demand at Annexures-B and C respectively in W.P. No.43194/2015 and W.P. No.43195/2015 as well as assessment order dated 31.10.2014 for the assessment year 2007-2008 and consequential notice of demand at Annexures-E and F respectively in W.P. No.46036/2015.
Learned counsel for the petitioners would contend that the re-assessment orders are hit by the principles of natural justice as the adverse material against
the petitioners-assessees were not confronted or furnished to the petitioners but on third party’s information, the impugned assessment orders have been passed.
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties.
This Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioners cannot invoke the extra-ordinary jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India circumventing the availability of alternative remedy of an appeal provided under the Act. Hence, the present petitions cannot be maintained and are disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to avail the alternative remedy by way of an appeal available under the provisions of the Act.
With the aforesaid observations, these writ petitions stand disposed of. No costs.
Sd/- JUDGE Mds/-