R S PUNITH vs. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF

PDF · subscribers
WP/4929/2013HC KarnatakaKAHC01000862201306 February 2013Bench: H.N.NAGAMOHAN DAS3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the petitioner should first exhaust the available remedy of appeal against the penalty order. The writ petition was rejected with liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal.

What were the facts?

The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking to quash an order levying a penalty under Section 271D of the Income Tax Act. The petitioner approached the High Court without first exhausting the statutory remedy of appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether a writ petition is maintainable when an alternative statutory remedy of appeal is available. The petitioner's failure to exhaust the appellate remedy.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271D

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 06TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2013

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE H.N.NAGAMOHAN DAS

WRIT PETITION NO.4929/2013 (T - IT)

BETWEEN :

R S PUNITH S/O R G SRINIVASA MURTHY AGED ABOUT 25 YERS R/A NO.242/A 4TH WARD, 6TH MAIN N R ROAD DAVANAGERE – 577 001 ... PETITIONER (BY SRI R RAM MURTHY, ADV.)

AND :

1.

THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DAVANAGERE RANGE DAVANAGERE – 577 001 2. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2 PARK VIEW BUILDING P J EXTENSION DAVANGERE – 577 001 ... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI K.V.ARAVIND, STANDING COUNSEL)

2 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER OF LEVY OF PENALTY PASSED BY THE R1 LEVYING A PENALTY OF RS. 14,49,759/- U/S 27 ID OF THE ACT DATED 28.9.12 VIDE ANNX-F AND ETC.

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

ORDER

Sri K.V.Aravind, learned Standing Counsel is directed to take notice for the respondents.

2.

In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the order dated 28.9.2012 at Annexure-F passed by the first respondent levying penalty under Section 271(D) of the Income Tax Act.

3.

An appeal is provided against the impugned order. Without exhausting the remedy of the appeal the petitioner is before this Court. Reserving liberty to the petitioner to work out his remedy by filing appeal before appropriate forum, this petition is hereby rejected.

4.

In the event, the petitioner filing the appeal within four weeks from today then the Appellate Authority to consider the same on merits without reference to question of delay.

Three weeks time is granted to file memo of appearance.

Sd/- JUDGE

nvj

More judgments on Section 271D

All 1,725 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271D →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →