https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763905 Writ jurisdiction under Article 226 was treated as unavailable where a statutory appellate remedy under the Income-tax Act existed, absent exceptional grounds to bypass that mechanism. The scrutiny selection challenge failed because CBDT guidelines on compulsory scrutiny did not bar other lawful selections and did not invalidate random selection by the Assessing Officer. The natural justice objection also failed because the taxpayer did not request a personal hearing in the prescribed manner, and the reply was considered in the assessment order. The assessment orders were therefore upheld. en-us Tue, 03 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 31 Dec 2024 08:43:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763905 Writ jurisdiction under Article 226 was treated as unavailable where a statutory appellate remedy under the Income-tax Act existed, absent exceptional grounds to bypass that mechanism. The scrutiny selection challenge failed because CBDT guidelines on compulsory scrutiny did not bar other lawful selections and did not invalidate random selection by the Assessing Officer. The natural justice objection also failed because the taxpayer did not request a personal hearing in the prescribed manner, and the reply was considered in the assessment order. The assessment orders were therefore upheld. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 03 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763905