TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (8) TMI 1261
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng disposed of. 3. In W.P.No.22293 of 2023, the petitioner has challenged the impugned Assessment Order dated 21.12.2022 passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. In the other two writ petitions i.e., W.P.No.22293 of 2023 and W.P.No.22302 of 2023, the petitioner has challenged the impugned orders dated 27.06.2023 and 29.06.2023 imposing penalty under Section 270A and Section 271AAD(1)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 5. Challenge to the impugned Assessment Order dated 21.12.2022 passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in W.P.No.22293 of 2023 cannot be countenanced in the light of the recent decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Assistant Commissio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ntarim Zila Parishad, AIR 1969 SC 556] and also Nivedita Sharma v. COAI, (2011) 14 SCC 337 : (2012) 4 SCC (Civ) 947]). In Thansingh Nathmal v. Supt. of Taxes, AIR 1964 SC 1419], the Constitution Bench of this Court made it amply clear that although the power of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution is very wide, the Court must exercise self-imposed restraint and not entertain the writ petition, if an alternative effective remedy is available to the aggrieved person. In paragraph 7, the Court observed thus:- (Thansingh Nathmal case [Thansingh Nathmal v. Supt. of Taxes, AIR 1964 SC 1419], AIR p. 1423) "7. Against the order of the Commissioner an order for reference could have been claimed if the appellants satisfied th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....does not therefore act as a court of appeal against the decision of a court or tribunal, to correct errors of fact, and does not by assuming jurisdiction under Article 226 trench upon an alternative remedy provided by statute for obtaining relief. Where it is open to the aggrieved petitioner to move another tribunal, or even itself in another jurisdiction for obtaining redress in the manner provided by a statute, the High Court normally will not permit by entertaining a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution the machinery created under the statute to be bypassed, and will leave the party applying to it to seek resort to the machinery so set up." 18. A priori, we have no hesitation in taking the view that what this Court can....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sessment order by way of writ petition on the ground that the same is without jurisdiction or passed in excess of jurisdiction - by overstepping or crossing the limits of jurisdiction including in flagrant disregard of law and rules of procedure or in violation of principles of natural justice, where no procedure is specified. The High Court may accede to such a challenge and can also non-suit the petitioner on the ground that alternative efficacious remedy is available and that be invoked by the writ petitioner. However, if the writ petitioner choses to approach the High Court after expiry of the maximum limitation period of 60 days prescribed under Section 31 of the 2005 Act, the High Court cannot disregard the statutory period for redres....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of a petition filed for seeking relief against the violation of the principle of natural justice, or iii. In case of a petition filed for seeking relief against the orders or proceedings that are made wholly without jurisdiction, or iv. In case of a petition filed for seeking relief by challenging the limits/jurisdiction of a particular act. 12. The impugned orders that have been passed by the Assessing Officer imposing penalty under the respective provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are neither without jurisdiction nor passed in violation of principles of natural justice. 13. It also cannot be said that the impugned orders suffer from any material irregularity warranting interference under Article 226 of the Con....