Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2022 (11) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (11) TMI 830 - HC - Income TaxMaintainability of the writ petitions against E-Assessment u/s 147 read with Section 144B - issue of jurisdiction to issue notice u/s 148 not raised before the assessment order passed - statutory remedy by way of an appeal under Section 246 (1) - HELD THAT:- The respondent have specifically asserted that they have proceeded to re-open the assessment in the light of the information uploaded on Insight Portal. The same is quoted to be a reason to believe that the income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment. It has also been asserted that the Income Tax Officer has not received any books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned during the search at M/s. Renuka Mata Multi-State Urban Co-operative Credit Society Limited in the case of the petitioner. We therefore find that it would necessary for the petitioners to contest and challenge the assessment orders on merits so as to substantiate the stand that the re-opening of the proceedings under Section 147 of the Act of 1961 was not at all justified and thus without jurisdiction. In reply to the show cause notice the petitioners did not seek to challenge the re-opening on the ground that it was without jurisdiction since the assessment was not sought to be re-opened in the light of Section 153C -Having responded to the show cause notice and having contested the same, the petitioners have permitted the orders of assessment to be passed. It would have been a different matter had the petitioners challenged the notice issued under Section 148 seeking to re-open the proceedings at that stage itself. The petitioners permitted the authorities to proceed under Section 147 by responding to the notice. It is only after passing of the assessment orders that is now sought to be urged that the re-opening was without jurisdiction and it ought to have been only under Section 153C of the Act of 1961. We may not be understood to have stated that in no case could such challenge be raised to the jurisdiction to re-opening of the proceedings. However in the facts of the present cases when in the reply to the show cause notice such stand as regards lack of jurisdiction was not raised and the same is being now raised after passing of the assessment orders, we are not inclined to invoke extra ordinary jurisdiction in favour of the petitioners especially since an efficacious statutory remedy is available. There can be no dispute with the proposition that if the impugned exercise is without jurisdiction, extra ordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India could be invoked. Similarly, acquiescence of a party would also not be relevant in that regard. However in the facts of the present cases when it is asserted by the respondents that the re-opening of the proceedings is based on the information uploaded on Insight Portal, the same is found sufficient for not invoking the extra ordinary jurisdiction. For all these reasons we are not inclined to entertain the writ petitions as filed. By clarifying that it would be open for the petitioners to invoke the statutory remedy as provided under the Income Tax Act, 1961 and by stating that this Court has not examined the impugned orders of assessment on merits, the writ petitions are not entertained.
|