Writ interference with reassessment declined where statutory appeal was already pending, with direction for expeditious appellate disposal

Where an assessee has already pursued the statutory appellate remedy against reassessment, the writ court may decline to interfere with the reassessment proceedings and notice issued under the Income-tax Act. The High Court noted that the challenge to reopening under sections 147(a) and 148 was already covered by a pending appeal against the reassessment order, so it did not examine the merits of the reopening. Instead, it disposed of the writ petition and directed the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) to decide the appeal expeditiously within the stipulated time.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ court should interfere with the reassessment proceedings and notice issued under the Income-tax Act when the assessee had already availed of the appellate remedy.

Analysis: The petition challenged reassessment under section 147(a) and notice under section 148 on the ground of absence of material for reopening. The Court declined interference, noting that the petitioner had already filed an appeal against the reassessment order and that the appellate remedy was pending. Instead of entertaining the writ on merits, the Court considered it appropriate to direct expeditious disposal of the appeal.

Conclusion: Interference with the reassessment proceedings was declined and the writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) to decide the appeal within the stipulated time.

Final Conclusion: The challenge to reassessment was not entertained in writ jurisdiction, and the matter was left to be decided in the pending appeal with a direction for early disposal.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an effective appellate remedy is already availed, the writ court may decline to interfere with reassessment proceedings and direct the appellate authority to decide the appeal expeditiously.

---