Court denies additional relief in Income Tax Act challenge, allows early hearing application. The court declined to provide additional relief to the petitioner challenging an assessment order and notice of attachment under the Income Tax Act, 1961. ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Court denies additional relief in Income Tax Act challenge, allows early hearing application.
The court declined to provide additional relief to the petitioner challenging an assessment order and notice of attachment under the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner had already filed a statutory appeal against the assessment order, and the court found no basis for further intervention despite delays in the appeal process. The court allowed the petitioner to apply for an early hearing, which would be considered by the Appellate Authority. The petition was disposed of without costs.
Issues: Challenge to assessment order and notice of attachment under Section 226 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Analysis: The petitioner challenged an assessment order dated 30.12.2019 and a notice of attachment dated 25.02.2020, assessing income at Rs. 33,64,957 for the Assessment Year 2017-18. A demand notice of Rs. 16,53,196 was issued under Section 156 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Subsequently, an attachment notice under Sub-Section (3) of Section 226 of the Act was issued for the petitioner's bank account due to non-payment of tax. The petitioner filed a petition against these actions.
The respondents stated that Rs. 4,45,000 had been attached from the bank account against the outstanding demand, and after the deposit of this amount, the account was released. They also mentioned that the petitioner had filed an appeal under Section 144 of the Act, which was pending consideration. The court noted that the facts presented by the respondents were not disputed.
The court found that since the petitioner had already availed the remedy of a statutory appeal against the assessment order, there was no basis for further indulgence, despite the petitioner's contention of delayed hearings due to a backlog of appeals. The non-availability of the Appellate Authority, as claimed by the petitioner, was disputed by the respondents.
Given the appeal already filed, the court declined to provide additional relief but allowed the petitioner to apply for an early hearing, which would be considered on its merits by the Appellate Authority. The petition was disposed of with these observations, and no costs were imposed.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
