Madhya Pradesh High Court
Jila Sahkari Kendriya Bank Maryadit vs The Principal Commissioner Of Income ... on 13 January, 2017
WP-625-2017
(JILA SAHKARI KENDRIYA BANK MARYADIT Vs THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF
INCOME TAX1)
13-01-2017
Shri Bhaskar Ganguly, learned counsel for the petitioner. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner/Bank under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the notice issued on 30th of March, 2016 under Section 148(1) and subsequently an order of assessment passed under Section 143(3)/147 of the Income Tax Act vide Annexure-P2 on 28th of December, 2016.
Even though, learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argued that the issuance of the show cause notice and the subsequent assessment are not in accordance with law, we are of the considered view that once the show cause notice has been issued and after consideration of the objection of the petitioner, an assessment order has also been passed, we find no reason to interfere into the matter in these proceedings under Article 226/227 of the Constitution.
Petitioner has to take recourse to the statutory remedy available by filing an appeal before the appellate authority and, thereafter, the second appeal before the Income Tax Appellate tribunal. As the statutory remedy is available to the petitioner, no case for indulgence by this Court exercising extra ordinary jurisdiction in a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is called for.
Granting liberty to the petitioner to take recourse to the remedy available under the Income Tax Act, this writ petition stands disposed of.
(RAJENDRA MENON) (SMT. ANJULI PALO) ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE JUDGE nd