MOHAMMAD ALI THYALE PURAYIL vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 5

PDF · subscribers
WP/35871/2017HC KarnatakaKAHC01009051201709 January 2018Bench: VINEET KOTHARI4 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the writ petitions were not maintainable as a regular appellate remedy was available to the assessee. The assessee was directed to avail the statutory appeal remedy within 30 days.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed writ petitions challenging penalty and revision orders instead of availing the regular appellate remedy. The Assessing Officer passed an assessment order under Section 144 and a penalty order under Section 271(1)(c).

What were the issues?

Whether writ petitions are maintainable when a statutory appellate remedy is available. The assessee's failure to exhaust the regular appeal process before approaching the High Court.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 271(1)(c),Section 264,Section 246

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Heard together (2 matters)

W.P.No.35871/2017
W.P.No.33151/2017

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

1/4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2018 BEFORE THE HON’BLE Dr.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI W.P.No.35871/2017 C/W W.P.No.33151/2017 (T-IT)

In W.P.No.35871/2017

BETWEEN

MOHAMMAD ALI THYALE PURAYIL WORKING AT INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT H.H. RULER’S COURT POST BOX No.12848, DUBAI, U.A.

ALSO AT HOTEL REGENCY #87/88, 5TH MAIN ROAD 1ST CROSS, GANDHINAGAR BANGALORE-560 009.

...PETITIONER (BY SMT VANAJA M.R. ADVOCATE)

AND

1.

Pr. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 5 ROOM No.538, 5TH FLOOR 80FT ROAD, KORAMANGALA BENGALURU-560 095.

2.

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD – (3) NOW 5 (2) UNITY BUILDING BENGALURU-560 002.

...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI E.I. SANMATHI, ADVOCATE)

Date of order 09-01-2018 W.P.No.35871/2017 Mohammad Ali Thyale Purayil Vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax 5 & another

2/4

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-1 TO CANCEL THE PENALTY ORDER PASSED BY R-2 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 BY ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED U/S 264 OF THE ACT DATED 11-9-2014 AT ANNEX-C & ETC.,

In W.P.No.33151/2017

BETWEEN

MOHAMMAD ALI THYALE PURAYIL WORKING AT INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT H.H. RULER’S COURT POST BOX No.12848, DUBAI, U.A.

ALSO AT HOTEL REGENCY #87/88, 5TH MAIN ROAD 1ST CROSS, GANDHINAGAR BANGALORE-560 009.

...PETITIONER (BY SMT VANAJA, ADVOCATE)

AND

1.

Pr. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 5 ROOM No.538, 5TH FLOOR 80FT ROAD, KORAMANGALA BENGALURU-560 095.

2.

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD – 3(4) QUEENS ROAD BENGALURU-560 001.

...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI E.I. SANMATHI, ADVOCATE FOR SRI JEEVAN J. NEERALGI, ADVOCATE)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE

Date of order 09-01-2018 W.P.No.35871/2017 Mohammad Ali Thyale Purayil Vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax 5 & another

3/4

ORDER OF THE R-1 DTD 31-3-2016 PASSED UNDER SECTION 264 OF THE ACT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 VIDE ANNEX-C & ETC.,

THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

Mrs. Vanaja M.R. Adv. for Petitioner. Mr. E.I. Sanmathi, Adv. for Respondents in W.P.No.35871/2017 Mr. E.I. Sanmathi, Adv. for Mr. Jeevan J. Neeralgi, Adv. for Respondents in W.P.No.33151/2017

Against the impugned Assessment Order passed by the Assessing Authority-Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(4), Bengaluru, in the case of the present petitioner-assessee- Mohammad Ali Thyale Purayil u/s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 28.03.2013 vide Annexure-A and Penalty Order u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act on 26.09.2013 vide Annexure-B, the petitioner-assessee instead of availing the regular remedy, by way of appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), filed a Revision Petition before the Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Bengaluru, u/s.264 of the Act.

2.

In view of the fact that a regular remedy was available to the petitioner-assessee against the impugned

Date of order 09-01-2018 W.P.No.35871/2017 Mohammad Ali Thyale Purayil Vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax 5 & another

4/4

Assessment Order, the present writ petitions are found to be not maintainable.

3.

The petitioner-assessee is, therefore, directed even now to avail the regular remedy, by way of an appeal, against the said order u/s. 246 of the Act. If such an appeal is filed within 30 days from today, then without raising any objection as to bar of limitation, the same may be entertained, subject to the assessee fulfilling the other conditions as per law.

With these observations, the writ petitions are disposed of. No costs.

Sd/- JUDGE

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →