Court gives petitioner one week to explain; no final order until then. Writ petitions dismissed.

The court refrained from delving into the correctness of the reasons for issuing the notices challenging assessments for the years 2003-04 and 2004-05. The court noted that the petitioner had the opportunity to provide an explanation but had not done so adequately. The court granted the petitioner one week to file a detailed explanation before the Assessing Officer and directed that no final order should be passed until the explanation was considered. The writ petitions were dismissed with no costs, and the connected miscellaneous petitions were closed accordingly.

---

---

Issues:
Challenging notices issued for assessment years 2003-04 and 2004-05, Reopening of assessment based on audit objection, Entertaining writ petitions vs. alternative remedies available under Income-tax Act.

Analysis:
The petitioner, a registered company operating a television network, challenged notices issued for assessment years 2003-04 and 2004-05. The Income-tax Department had accepted the petitioner's returns for these years initially. However, the Department later issued notices under section 148 of the Income-tax Act based on audit objections. The petitioner contended that reopening assessments solely on audit objections was impermissible under established legal principles cited in previous judgments. The petitioner sought to quash the notices on this basis.

In response, the respondent argued that the petitioner had alternative remedies available under the Income-tax Act, such as appeals before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal and further appeals to the High Court. The respondent also highlighted that the petitioner had appeared before the Assessing Officer and was granted time to provide an explanation for the notices. The respondent contended that since the petitioner had not submitted a detailed explanation despite being granted time, the writ petitions were not maintainable.

After hearing both parties, the court refrained from delving into the correctness of the reasons for issuing the notices. The court noted that the petitioner had appeared before the Assessing Officer and was given time to submit an explanation. As the matter was scheduled for further hearing, the court declined to interfere with the notices at that stage. To ensure justice, the court granted the petitioner one week to file a detailed explanation before the Assessing Officer. The court directed that no final order should be passed by the respondent until the explanation was considered. The writ petitions were dismissed with no costs, and the connected miscellaneous petitions were closed accordingly.

---