https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=750873 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. en-us Mon, 29 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 12 Jan 2026 10:21:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=750873 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. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 29 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=750873