https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290136 Where a taxing statute provides a complete appellate and reference machinery, Article 226 is not used to bypass that scheme and challenge income-tax notices, assessments, or registration orders. The Income-tax Officer was held competent to decide the preliminary questions under Section 34, including escapement, limitation, retrospectivity, and the validity of reopening; any error in deciding those matters did not by itself create a jurisdictional defect. Orders refusing or cancelling registration, and the consequential assessments on partners and the Hindu undivided family, were likewise treated as matters for the statutory tax forums. The writ petition was therefore left to the remedies available under the Act. en-us Mon, 15 Sep 1952 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 10 Sep 2020 15:48:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290136 Where a taxing statute provides a complete appellate and reference machinery, Article 226 is not used to bypass that scheme and challenge income-tax notices, assessments, or registration orders. The Income-tax Officer was held competent to decide the preliminary questions under Section 34, including escapement, limitation, retrospectivity, and the validity of reopening; any error in deciding those matters did not by itself create a jurisdictional defect. Orders refusing or cancelling registration, and the consequential assessments on partners and the Hindu undivided family, were likewise treated as matters for the statutory tax forums. The writ petition was therefore left to the remedies available under the Act. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 15 Sep 1952 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290136