Income tax reassessment notices u/ss 148/148A challenged via writ despite appeal remedy; petition dismissed as not maintainable.

The dominant issue was whether a writ petition under Art. 226 was maintainable to challenge reassessment proceedings, including notices under ss. 148 and 148A of the Income Tax Act, when a statutory appellate remedy existed. The HC held that although writ jurisdiction is plenary, fiscal matters attract stricter adherence to the rule of alternate efficacious remedy, and SC jurisprudence discourages entertaining writs where statutory conditions such as pre-deposit for stay are bypassed. The HC further noted that statutory notices are ordinarily not amenable to writ review, and alleged breach of natural justice must be assessed contextually. The writ petition was dismissed as not entertainable due to availability of an efficacious statutory remedy.

---

---

Issues Involved:
Challenging final order of assessment and demand notice under Income Tax Act, 1961.

Summary:
The petitioner challenged the assessment order and demand notice dated 28th March 2023, along with penalty notices under sections 270A, 271A, and 271B. The petitioner also disputed the basis for issuing notices under sections 148 and 148-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Revenue objected to the maintainability of the writ petition, stating that statutory notices can only be challenged if illegal or without jurisdiction, and that the petitioner has an appeal remedy under section 246 of the Act.

The petitioner, running a proprietary concern, received multiple notices under different sections of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2018-19. The petitioner argued against multiple proceedings for the same period and issue, highlighting previous legal challenges and objections raised during the process. The Assessing Officer added a significant amount to the total income in the assessment order dated 28th March 2023, leading to further challenges by the petitioner.

The petitioner's main grounds for challenge were detailed in the writ petition, emphasizing previous proceedings, appeals, and penalty actions. The legal framework of the Income Tax Act entrusts the determination of facts and law to Income Tax Officers, with provisions for assessment, reassessment, and relief against improper orders. The court referred to relevant legal precedents to support the arguments presented by both parties.

The Revenue contended that the notices were issued based on information from the Commercial Taxes Department, alleging bogus transactions to suppress gross profit. The court refrained from making judgments on the merits, emphasizing the petitioner's right to appeal the assessment order. Ultimately, the writ petition was dismissed, citing the petitioner's available remedies under the Income Tax Act, 1961.

The judgment was delivered by Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Anubha Rawat Choudhary of the Jharkhand High Court.

---