9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (1) TMI 825X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (Ex. 'J') and after going through the same and examining the question of legality thereof to quash, cancel and set aside the impugned assessment order u/s. 143 (3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act, dated 21st March, 2024 along with the Notice of Demand u/s. 156 of the Act dated 21st March, 2024 (Ex. 'J'); (b) that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India ordering and directing the Respondent No.1 to withdraw and cancel the impugned Show cause Notice dated 21st February, 2024 (Ex. 'F') and the assessment order u/s. 143 (3) r.w.s.144B of the Act, dated 21st March, 2024 along with the Notice of Demand u/s 156 of the Act dated 21st March, 2024 (Ex. 'J'); (c) that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of prohibition or a writ in the nature of prohibition or any other appropriate writ, order or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India ordering and directing the Respondent No.3, not to proceed with or in pursuance of or in furtherance of the impugned assessment order u/s. 143 (3) r.w.s.144B of the Act, dated 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... were completed for the said years by accepting the Petitioner's Project Completion Method of Accounting. He submitted that such assessments have attained finality. 7. Mr. Mistri submitted that, given the above position, it was not open to the Assessing Officer to assess the Petitioner on the Percentage of Completion Method for the assessment year to which this Petition relates. He submitted that such an exercise is contrary to the statute and several decisions, including but not restricted to (1) Commissioner of Income-tax-15 Vs Aditya Builders [2017] 79 taxmann.com 394 (Bombay) (2) Commissioner of Income-tax Vs Bilahari Investment (P.) Ltd. [2008] 168 Taxman 95 (SC) and (3) Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-8 Vs M/s. Quest Investment Advisors Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Appeal No.280 of 2016 decided on 28 June 2018. 8. Mr. Mistri submitted that since the impugned assessment order and the demands based upon the same are without jurisdiction, contrary to statute and in defiance of binding judicial precedents, this Court should not relegate the Petitioner to avail of the alternate remedy of appeal. He submitted that the Appellate Authority may insist upon a pre-deposit by relying on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... grievances is improper. All kinds of arguments are raised based on such pleadings, taking the opposite party by surprise. 16. The remedy of appeal in this case is also adequate, apart from being alternate and efficacious. All the reliefs the Petitioner seeks can also be availed by resorting to the alternate remedy. The contentions raised by Mr. Mistri will no doubt require investigation. However, the statutory remedies cannot be so lightly bypassed by simply portraying the case as being open and shut and then alleging that the entire exercise is wholly without jurisdiction. 17. As it is, the pressure on the docket of this Court is extreme. Though this is certainly not a ground for not entertaining Petitions where a case to entertain the same is made out, we still think that the alternate statutory remedies cannot be allowed to be lightly bypassed by merely contending that there are some serious errors in the orders and then attempting to assert that every such error raises some jurisdictional issue. 18. In Whirlpool Corporation vs. Registrar of Trade Marks, Mumbai and others (1998) 8 SCC 1, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that alternative statutory remedies are not a constitu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Petitioner as the business of the Petitioner is not that of construction contract or a contract for providing services, but the Petitioner is in the business of real estate development." The Petitioner has also raised some grounds regards the interpretation of the terms "construction contract". The Petitioner has raised some grounds concerning the commencement of the development of Shandilya Villa Project and how, it was not mandatory for the Petitioner to follow the Percentage of Completion Method. All these matters are best looked into by the Appellate Authorities under the IT Act in the first instance. No case is made out to completely short circuit the established procedures. 23. As noted earlier, at this stage, we do not wish to make any observations on the grounds urged by Mr. Mistri or the grounds raised in the Petition. However, we are satisfied that all these grounds are best raised before the Appellate Authorities under the IT Act so that they are adequately adjudicated after adverting to the record. The Petitioner cannot convert this Court into an Appellate Forum, bypassing the appellate remedies provided under the IT Act. 24. Mr Sharma, the learned counsel for the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... can also take judicial notice of the fact that the vast majority of the petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution are filed solely for the purpose of obtaining interim orders and thereafter prolong the proceedings by one device or the other. The practice certainly needs to be strongly discouraged". 28. In Greatship (India) Limited (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court did not approve the decision of the High Court to entertain the Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the assessment order given the statutory alternate remedies available under the Maharashtra Value Added Tax 2002 and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. The Court held that the assessee showed no valid reasons to bypass the statutory remedy of appeal and that the Supreme Court has consistently taken the view that when an alternate remedy is available, judicial prudence demands that the courts refrain from exercising its jurisdiction under constitutional provisions. 29. For all the above reasons, we decline to entertain this Petition. However, we leave it open to the Petitioner to avail the alternate remedy of appeal by clarifying that we have not examined the rival contentions on me ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
