TMI Blog2022 (6) TMI 751X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The correctness of order under Section 148A(d) is being challenged on the factual premise contending that jurisdiction though vested has been wrongly exercised. By now it is well settled that there is vexed distinction between jurisdictional error and error of law/fact within jurisdiction. For rectification of errors statutory remedy has been provided. In the light of aforesaid settled proposition of law, we find that there is no reason to warrant interference by this Court in exercise of the jurisdiction under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India at this intermediate stage when the proceedings initiated are yet to be concluded by a statutory authority. Hence, the writ petition stands dismissed. - CWP No. 10596 of 2022(O&M) - - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the controversy when AO is yet to frame assessment/re-assemment in discharge of statutory duty casted upon him under Section 147 of the Act ? 5. The debate is not new. While dealing with the similar situation under the old Act i.e. Indian Income Tax Act, 1922, Division Bench of this Court in 'Lachhman Das Nayar and others vs. Hans Raj Puri, Income-Tax Officer, Amritsar and others, 1953 AIR (P H) 55, held that - An examination of the scheme of the Act and the words used in section 34 of the Act and the various cases that I have referred to above show that the legislature has entrusted the determination of facts and of law to the Income-tax Officers. A particular machinery has been set up under the Act by the use of which a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... got equally efficacious recourses under the Act. 30. A somewhat similar dictum is discernible from CIT v. Chhabil Dass Agarwal (2014) 1 SCC 603 as it holds that the Act provides complete machinery for the assessment/reassessment of tax, imposition of penalty and for obtaining relief in respect of any improper orders passed by the Revenue Authorities, and the assessee could not be permitted to abandon that machinery and to invoke the jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution when he had adequate remedy open to him by an appeal to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). 31. Having held so, it is not expedient for this Court to express its opinion on the rival submissions as it may unwittingly cause pre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of material facts by the assessee or not. We have only to see whether there was prima facie some material on the basis of which the Department could reopen the case. The sufficiency or correctness of the material is not a thing to be considered at this stage. We are of the view that the court cannot strike down the reopening of the case in the facts of this case. It will be open to the assessee to prove that the assumption of facts made in the notice was erroneous. The assessee may also prove that no new facts came to the knowledge of the Income-tax Officer after completion of the assessment proceeding. We are not expressing any opinion on the merits of the case. The questions of fact and law are left open to be investigated and decided by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
