TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (5) TMI 189
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Standing Counsel for Income Tax Department appearing on behalf of the respondents. 2. The instant is a writ petition filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India assailing the impugned intimation dated 11.11.2019 issued by the respondent No.2 under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act') for the assessment year 2018-19. 3. The substantial ground on which the writ petition has been filed is that prior to passing of the impugned intimation under Section 143(1) of the Act, the Department itself had already passed an order of assessment under Section 143(2) of the Act on 23.09.2019, which was also taken for scrutiny assessment and the returns submitted by the petitioner were found to be ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ct is merely considered in computation of income is also ex-facie arbitrary, illogical, unjust and unlawful. 6. Lastly, the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the exercise of power under Section 143(2) of the Act by respondent No.1 on 23.09.2019 deprived or precluded respondent No.2 from proceedings under Section 143(1) of the Act. As such, the impugned intimation was passed without jurisdiction and is nullity in the eyes of law. 7. In support of the aforesaid contentions, the learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vodafone Idea Limited (earlier known as Vodafone Mobile Services Limited) vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 26(2) and Another [....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....led the remedy available under the statute and the very same statute also prescribes for yet another remedy of second appeal before the ITAT, which the petitioner did not avail. 11. Having heard the contentions put forth on either side and on perusal of records, particularly taking into consideration the facts and submissions narrated in the writ affidavit, it is evidently clear that proceedings under Section 143(2) of the Act were initiated by the Department vide notice dated 23.09.2019. The petitioner entered appearance and submitted his response to the said notice on 08.10.2019 and finally an order under Section 143(3) of the Act was passed on 31.03.2021 accepting the returns submitted by the petitioner. There seems to be certain erro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o the ITAT for ventilating his grievance and bypassing the said remedy has chosen to seek writ remedy. It is well settled proposition of law that writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not to be exercised as a matter of routine. The said remedy is to be exercised only in exceptional circumstances where there is a breach of fundamental rights or there is a violation of the principles of natural justice or where the very competence and jurisdiction of the authority which has passed the order is under dispute. 13. What needs to be appreciated at this juncture, as has been discussed in the preceding paragraphs is that, the substantive relief which the petitioner has sought for is against the intimation dated 11.1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on 143(2) and 143(3) have already been passed, which the petitioner did not avail. Having availed the remedy of appeal as is provided under the Act, it would be more appropriate if the petitioner ought to have challenged the order of the CIT (Appeals) by way of an appeal before the ITAT. 15. So far the judgment cited by the learned counsel for the petitioner in his pleadings so far as reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Harbanslal Sahnia vs. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. [(2003) 2 SCC 107] and other similar judgments, we are of the considered opinion that they are distinguishable insofar as the facts are concerned. In the said cases the situation or the facts were not similar to the facts in the present cas....