9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (4) TMI 33X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urged that a writ petition is maintainable against the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. There is no doubt that an alternative remedy is not an absolute bar to a writ petition but ordinarily this court insists that a petitioner should resort to his alternative remedy if it is available and this court ordinarily does not exercise its discretionary jurisdiction under article 226 if an alternative remedy is available. In the present case, it appears that an assessment order was passed under section 143(3) against the petitioner on June 27, 1986, vide annexure 2 to the petition. Against that order, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) which was allowed. Against the order of the Commissioner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the said provision but instead the petitioner had chosen to file a miscellaneous application apparently under section 254(2) before the Tribunal. This first miscellaneous application was rejected by the order dated October 21, 1991, in which it was held that there was no mistake in the order of the Tribunal and the attempt of the assessee was only to get the said order reviewed which cannot be done under section 254(2). If the petitioner was aggrieved against the order dated October 21, 1991, its remedy was to file a reference application under section 256(1) against the said order, because as can be seen from a perusal of section 256(1), a reference application can be filed before the Tribunal not only against the original order of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... us applications one after another instead of availing of his statutory remedy of reference application. It may be mentioned that the Income-tax Act prescribes the various channels of filing appeal, reference, etc., and if a party is aggrieved against an order of the Tribunal his remedy is to file a reference application and not a writ petition ; this has been held by this court in Chemicals and Allied Products v. ITAT [1989] 175 ITR 344 and this view has also been taken in Writ Petition No. 1324 of 1993, Smt. Poonam Kumari v. ITAT decided on September 27, 1995. Hence, we dismiss the petition on the ground that the petitioner had an alternative remedy of filing a reference application. As regards the decision of the Supreme Court in the ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
