2026 (3) TMI 820

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ingle Judge in W.P.No.10701 of 2024, the unsuccessful petitioner has filed this writ appeal. 2. The appellant filed the writ petition seeking issuance of a writ of certiorari to quash the assessment order dated 19.3.2024, by which a sum of Rs. 6,20,08,350/- together with processing charge of Rs. 34,70,942/- has been disallowed as unexplained expenses in the return of income filed. 3. The case of the appellant before the learned Single Judge was that the assessment order was passed in gross violation of the principles of natural justice and that the transactions made by the appellant with Vishal Bharath Processing Mill pertain to HUF and not with M.Sivakumar, who had also income from the HUF, in his individual capacity. 4. The respo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ficacious alternative remedy available. The learned Single Judge granted the appellant 30 days time to file appeal. However, the appellant without filing a statutory appeal, filed this writ appeal. 10. At this juncture, it is apposite to refer to the observation made by the Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Chhabil Dass Agarwal [(2014) 1 SCC 603 ], wherein it has been held thus: "10. In the instant case, the only question which arises for our consideration and decision is whether the High Court was justified in interfering with the order passed by the assessing authority under Section 148 of the Act in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 when an equally efficacious alternate remedy was available to the assessee unde....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... are repealed, or when an order has been passed in total violation of the principles of natural justice, the proposition laid down in Thansingh Nathmal case [AIR 1964 SC 1419], Titaghur Paper Mills Co. Ltd. v. State of Orissa, (1983) 2 SCC 433, and other similar judgments that the High Court will not entertain a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution if an effective alternative remedy is available to the aggrieved person or the statute under which the action complained of has been taken itself contains a mechanism for redressal of grievance still holds the field. Therefore, when a statutory forum is created by law for redressal of grievances, a writ petition should not be entertained ignoring the statutory dispensation. 16.....