Facts of the Case
The petitioner challenged assessment orders passed under Section
153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 before the Delhi High Court by way of writ
petitions. The grievance raised was that the assessment orders were passed
without granting sufficient time and adequate opportunity to present the case,
thereby violating principles of natural justice. It was contended that the
assessment was completed within a short span of nine days.
However, during the proceedings, it was admitted that the
petitioner had already preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income
Tax (Appeals) against the same assessment orders under Section 153A.
The tax demand raised against the petitioner was approximately
₹18–19 crores, and the petitioner submitted inability to pay the demand.
Issues Involved
- Whether
a writ petition under Article 226 is maintainable when the petitioner has
already availed an alternative statutory appellate remedy?
- Whether
the assessment order under Section 153A could be challenged directly in
writ jurisdiction on grounds of violation of natural justice?
- Whether
interim protection from coercive recovery should continue pending the
appellate proceedings?
Petitioner’s Arguments
- The
petitioner argued that the assessment order under Section 153A was
legally unsustainable.
- It
was contended that sufficient opportunity of hearing was not granted.
- The
petitioner submitted that the order was passed hastily within nine days.
- It
was argued that such hurried adjudication amounted to violation of
principles of natural justice.
- The
petitioner also highlighted financial hardship due to the huge tax demand
raised.
Respondent’s Arguments
- The
Revenue opposed the writ petitions and contested the allegations raised by
the petitioner.
- It
was submitted that the petitioner had already invoked the statutory
appellate remedy against the same order.
- Therefore, writ jurisdiction should not be exercised where an effective alternate remedy exists.
Court Findings / Court Order
The Delhi High Court held that:
- Once
the petitioner had already filed an appeal against the assessment order
under Section 153A, the petitioner could not simultaneously pursue writ
proceedings challenging the same order.
- A
litigant cannot be permitted to avail two parallel remedies against the
same cause.
- The
appellate authority is competent to examine all issues, including
allegations relating to denial of adequate opportunity and natural justice
violations.
- Ordinarily,
writ petitions are not entertained where effective alternative statutory
remedies are available and have already been exercised.
Accordingly, the writ petitions were disposed of and the Court declined to exercise writ jurisdiction.
Important Clarification by the Court
The Court expressly clarified that:
- It
had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the additions made in the
assessment order.
- The
petitioner was free to pursue appellate remedies.
- The
interim protection against coercive recovery was extended for five
weeks to enable the petitioner to seek stay before the appellate
authority.
Sections Involved
- Section
153A, Income Tax Act, 1961 – Assessment in case of
search or requisition
- Appellate
Remedies under the Income Tax Act, 1961
- Principles
of Natural Justice
- Article
226 of the Constitution of India – Writ Jurisdiction of High
Courts
Link to download the order - https://delhihighcourt.nic.in/app/case_number_pdf/2018:DHC:9138-DB/SKN21022018CW6462017_170706.pdf
Disclaimer
This content is shared strictly for general information and
knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information
from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or
advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability
arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the
assistance of AI tools.
0 Comments
Leave a Comment