Writ Petition on Income Tax Proceedings u/s 148: Court Affirms Jurisdictional Challenges Under Article 226.

The HC upheld the maintainability of the writ petition challenging the initiation of proceedings under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Court rejected the preliminary objection regarding the availability of an alternate statutory remedy, emphasizing that jurisdictional issues could be addressed under Article 226. The case was admitted for further hearing, with the merits to be considered subsequently.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Challenge to notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for re-opening assessment.
2. Preliminary objection to the maintainability of the writ petition based on the availability of an alternate statutory remedy.
3. Jurisdictional challenge to the initiation of proceedings under Section 148 of the Act of 1961.

For the first issue, the petitioner challenged the notices dated 31/03/2021 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, seeking to re-open the assessment for the year 2017-2018. Additionally, a challenge was raised against the communication dated 19/12/2021 turning down the objection to the re-opening process.

Regarding the second issue, the respondent's counsel raised a preliminary objection to the maintainability of the writ petition, arguing that the petitioner has an alternate statutory remedy through an appeal under the Act of 1961. It was contended that all grounds raised in the writ petition could be addressed in the statutory proceedings, and there was no exceptional case warranting the invocation of writ jurisdiction.

On the third issue, the petitioner's counsel argued that challenging the jurisdiction of the respondent in initiating proceedings under Section 148 of the Act of 1961 could be entertained under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner contended that the statutory requirements for initiating the proceedings were not met, thus questioning the jurisdiction to commence such proceedings.

The High Court considered the maintainability of the writ petition in light of the jurisdictional challenge raised. It referenced a recent decision of the Supreme Court, emphasizing the distinction between maintainability and entertainability of a writ petition. The Court noted that when a jurisdictional issue is raised challenging the exercise of statutory power, it can be considered in writ jurisdiction. The Court held that since the petitioner challenged the initiation of proceedings under Section 148, the writ petition was maintainable and liable to be entertained on merits.

Ultimately, the Court rejected the preliminary objection to the maintainability of the writ petition. The case was directed to be heard for admission to further consider the challenges raised in the petition. The Court did not delve into the merits of the case at this stage, leaving them to be addressed during the subsequent hearing.

---