Court partially allows writ petitions challenging Income Tax Officer's notices under Section 153A, grants appeal liberty, and payment protection.

The court partially allowed the writ petitions challenging the impugned notices issued by the Income Tax Officer under Section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The court directed the officer to furnish reasons promptly and granted the petitioner liberty to appeal the Assessment Orders within a specified period. The petitioner was protected from coercion for payments pending appeal, ensuring a fair opportunity for appeal while emphasizing the importance of statutory remedies like appeals under the Income Tax Act.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to impugned notices dated 11.09.2017 and 10.10.2018 issued by the Income Tax Officer under Section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Invocation of writ jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. Availability of alternate remedy of appeal. Refusal to furnish reasons for notice issuance. Procedural defects in Assessment Orders.

Analysis:
The petitioner sought to quash the impugned notices issued by the Income Tax Officer and to compel the officer to furnish reasons for the notice under Section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner argued that the demand notices were issued in violation of the law, claiming errors in stating that no Returns were filed despite timely submission. The Revenue, represented by panel counsel, contended that the petitioner had an alternate and efficacious remedy of appeal under the Income Tax Act, which should have been pursued. The panel counsel emphasized that in fiscal disputes, writ jurisdiction is generally not invocable, unless under exceptional circumstances not applicable to the petitioner's case.

The petitioner's plea for reasons behind the notice issuance was countered by the Revenue, citing a pre-condition of filing Returns before soliciting such information. The court considered the arguments from both sides, including references to relevant legal precedents, emphasizing the importance of statutory remedies like appeals provided under the Income Tax Act. The court noted that the right of appeal is subject to compliance with statutory conditions, and failure to avail such remedies does not constitute a valid ground for invoking writ jurisdiction.

Regarding the refusal to furnish reasons, the court acknowledged the petitioner's claim that the action of the Revenue was vulnerable due to non-compliance. However, the court indicated that the petitioner would be provided with the reasons as Returns had been filed subsequently. The court also highlighted the need for limited protection for the petitioner to ensure a meaningful right of appeal, citing a case where coercive actions were cautioned against before exhausting legal remedies.

In the final judgment, the court partially allowed the writ petitions, directing the Income Tax Officer to furnish reasons for the notices promptly. The petitioner was granted the liberty to challenge the Assessment Orders through appeal within a specified period, with assurances that issues of limitation and delay would not impede the process. The petitioner was protected from coercion to make payments pending the appeal filing, ensuring a fair opportunity for appeal. All contentions of the parties were kept open, with the order tailored to the specific circumstances of the case to prevent its use as precedent.

---