Writ relief despite appellate remedy where reassessment denied a real opportunity to produce Form F during lockdown.

Writ jurisdiction under Article 226 remained available despite an appellate remedy where the challenge alleged breach of natural justice. The reassessment was held vulnerable because the taxpayer was not given a real opportunity to produce Form F or to be heard during the COVID-19 lockdown, even though the document was central to the tax characterisation of the transfer. The reassessment and final assessment notice were therefore set aside, and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration from the hearing stage after allowing production of the required material.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the writ petition was maintainable under Article 226 despite the availability of an appellate remedy against the reassessment order; (ii) whether the reassessment order was vitiated for breach of natural justice on account of denial of effective opportunity to produce Form F during the COVID-19 lockdown.

Issue (i): Whether the writ petition was maintainable under Article 226 despite the availability of an appellate remedy against the reassessment order.

Analysis: The existence of an alternative appeal remedy does not bar writ jurisdiction where the impugned action is alleged to be vitiated by breach of natural justice. The challenge was not a routine attack on the reassessment merits but a complaint that the petitioner was denied a meaningful opportunity to participate in the proceedings and to place the required documents before the authority. In such a case, the availability of appeal was not treated as an effective or adequate answer to the grievance.

Conclusion: The writ petition was maintainable, and the alternative remedy did not preclude interference.

Issue (ii): Whether the reassessment order was vitiated for breach of natural justice on account of denial of effective opportunity to produce Form F during the COVID-19 lockdown.

Analysis: The reassessment was made in a period when lockdown restrictions were in force and the petitioner had sought time to obtain Form F from the Rajasthan authority. The record showed that the officer proceeded to pass the reassessment order without affording a real opportunity to file the document or to be heard, notwithstanding the exceptional circumstances then prevailing. Since Form F was central to the characterization of the transfer and to the tax consequence, denial of opportunity amounted to a clear procedural unfairness.

Conclusion: The reassessment order was vitiated by breach of natural justice and could not stand.

Final Conclusion: The reassessment and final notice of assessment were set aside, and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration from the stage of hearing after granting the petitioner an opportunity to produce the required material.

Ratio Decidendi: A reassessment order passed without a real and effective opportunity to produce material evidence, especially in exceptional lockdown circumstances, is vulnerable for breach of natural justice, and the existence of an appellate remedy does not bar writ relief in such a case.

---