Alternative remedy and partner assessment rectification under income tax law upheld where firm reassessment followed the statutory cutoff.

Availability of an alternative statutory remedy does not operate as an absolute bar to writ jurisdiction; however, where the challenge turns on disputed facts such as service and dissolution, the Court may decline writ adjudication and leave the matter to the statutory forum. On section 35(5) of the Indian Income Tax Act, 1922, the provision was held to apply where the firm's reassessment occurred after 1-4-1952, even though the partners' original assessments had already been completed. Rectification of the partners' completed assessments to reflect the firm's revised income was therefore valid, and the challenge failed.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the existence of an alternative statutory remedy barred the writ petition challenging the rectification and reassessment proceedings. (ii) Whether section 35(5) of the Indian Income Tax Act, 1922 applied to rectify the partners' completed assessments when the firm's reassessment was made after 1-4-1952.

Issue (i): Whether the existence of an alternative statutory remedy barred the writ petition challenging the rectification and reassessment proceedings.

Analysis: The availability of an alternative remedy does not create an absolute bar to writ jurisdiction. The question depends on the facts and circumstances of the case. Where the challenge involves disputed facts and the assessee has already pursued the remedies available under the taxing statute, the Court may decline to decide the disputed jurisdictional questions in writ proceedings. On the facts, the challenge to service, dissolution, and related matters was not fit for adjudication in the writ petition.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not barred merely because an alternative remedy existed, but the disputed factual objections were not adjudicated in writ jurisdiction.

Issue (ii): Whether section 35(5) of the Indian Income Tax Act, 1922 applied to rectify the partners' completed assessments when the firm's reassessment was made after 1-4-1952.

Analysis: Section 35(5) treated rectification of a partner's completed assessment, necessitated by the assessment or reassessment of the firm, as rectification of a mistake apparent from the record. The provision was held to be operative where the triggering reassessment of the firm occurred after 1-4-1952, even if the partner's original assessment had been completed earlier. The provision was read as giving effect to the later assessment or reassessment of the firm and not as being confined only to partner assessments completed after that date.

Conclusion: Section 35(5) was applicable, and the rectification of the partners' assessments was valid.

Final Conclusion: The challenge to the rectification failed, and the revenue's action was sustained, resulting in dismissal of the appeal.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the reassessment of a firm occurs after the commencement of section 35(5), the Income Tax Officer may rectify the completed assessment of a partner to reflect the firm's revised income, and the provision is not confined to cases where the partner's own assessment was completed after 1-4-1952.

---