TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (11) TMI 421
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Petition. Learned Deputy Solicitor General of India (DSGI) appearing for the Objector-Respondent, submits that, the Writ Petitioner is debarred from invoking the writ jurisdiction of this High Court when an efficacious alternative remedy is available by way of statutory provisions, which the Writ Petitioner has failed to invoke, but has instead approached the High Court. It is contended that on receiving the information of income having escaped assessment within the meaning of Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (IT Act), based on the objections raised by the Revenue Audit, Notice under Section 148A(b) of the IT Act dated 19-03-2022 was issued to the Writ Petitioner on three issues, namely, (a) under charge of deemed income und....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the IT Act. (i) Inviting the attention of this Court to the contents of Section 148 of the IT Act it was argued that several conditions have been prescribed therein for issuance of Notice. Notice to the Writ Petitioner could not be contemplated under the prescribed conditions. (ii) The Explanation to Section 149 of the IT Act requires that for the purposes of Section 149(1)(b) "asset" shall include immovable property being land, building or both, shares and securities, loan and advances, deposits in Bank Account. The amount of Rs. 22,99,92,702/- reflected in the impugned Order, does not fall under any of the foregoing definitions of the Explanation, for the reason that, the said amount was the deposit made by the concer....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Assessing Officer in the re-assessment proceedings. Contrary thereto, in Red Chilli International Sales (supra), the Supreme Court vide Order dated 03-01-2023, inter alia observed that the Court was with the Writ Petitioner as the impugned Judgment rejecting the Writ Petition on the ground of alternative remedy, does not take into consideration several Judgments of the Supreme Court on the jurisdiction of the High Court, as Writ Petitions have been entertained to examine whether the jurisdiction, pre-conditions, for issuance of Notice under Section 148 of the IT Act is satisfied. (iii) Strength was also garnered from the decision in Uttar Pradesh Power Transmission Corporation Limited and Another vs. CG Power and Industrial Sol....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Petition on the ground of an alternative remedy being available. 3. Due consideration has been given to the rival contentions advanced by Learned Counsel for the parties and the relevant pleadings perused. At the outset, I am not inclined to agree with the submission of the Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner that the IT Act makes no provision for appeals against an Order under Section 148A(d) of the IT Act as a reading of Section 246A(1)(b) makes such room. That having been said, it is now a settled position of law that the power to issue prerogative writs under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is plenary and discretionary in nature. Relevant reference is made to the observation of the Supreme Court in Uttar Pradesh Power T....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... availability of a remedy under the very statute which has been invoked and has given rise to the action impugned in the writ petition ought not to be made in a routine manner, yet, the mere fact that the petitioner before the High Court, in a given case, has not pursued the alternative remedy available to him/it cannot mechanically be construed as a ground for its dismissal. It is axiomatic that the High Courts (bearing in mind the facts of each particular case) have a discretion whether to entertain a writ petition or not. One of the self-imposed restrictions on the exercise of power under Article 226 that has evolved through judicial precedents is that the High Courts should normally not entertain a writ petition, where an effective and ....