9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (12) TMI 1023X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nto service, and a direction was issued to the banker of the petitioner to pay out of the accounts of the petitioner, a sum equivalent to the Income Tax liability standing against the petitioner. The petitioner in this petition is seeking to contest the demand on merits, in that, it is argued on behalf of the petitioner that the entire Tax deducted at source stood deposited, and, therefore, the demand raised by the respondent no. 3 was non-est in the eye of law. Without going into the merits of the demand and adjudicating the disputed question of facts, we are of the view that the petitioner, if aggrieved by the intimation of demand issued by respondent no. 3 under Sub-Section 1 of Section 200A is well within its rights to file an appeal be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dy or accept the demand. We find no merit in this petition, and the same is accordingly dismissed. - OWP No. 1019/2016 - - - Dated:- 20-12-2022 - HON BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE And HON BLE MS. JUSTICE MOKSHA KHAJURIA KAZMI, JUDGE For the Petitioner : Mr. R.A Jan, Sr. Adv. With, Mr. Aswad Atar, Adv For the Respondent : Mr. T.M. Shamsi, DSGI for 1. Mr. Aatir Javed Kawoosa, Adv. For 2 3. Mr. A Hanan, Adv. For 4 to 7. None for 8 9 JUDGMENT Per Sanjeev Kumar-J: 1. The petitioner is a partnership concern engaged in the business of construction of major projects including Bridges, Flyovers, Office Complexes and other Roads and Buildings. The petitioner concerned is an Assessee under the Income Tax Act, 19 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... corrective action without any further delay. The intimation of outstanding demand issued on 3rd March, 2016, was served upon the petitioner on 31st March, 2016. The respondent no. 3 also issued a show cause notice to the petitioner under Section 221(1) of the Income Tax Act, on 22nd March, 2016, calling upon the petitioner to appear either personally or through his authorized representative to show cause as to why the penalty should not be levied. This show cause notice, too, was received by the petitioner on 24th March, 2016. The petitioner, as it appears from the record as also from the pleadings, did not respond to either the demand notice dated 3rd March, 2016, or show cause notice issued by respondent no. 3 on 22nd March, 2016. Since t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issued by the Assessing authority under Section 226 (3) issued by respondent No. 3 without challenging the intimation of demand made by the Assessing authority under Section 200A of the Income Tax Act is not maintainable. From reading of the petition and the prayers made therein, it clearly transpires that petitioner is not aggrieved of the demand raised by the respondent No. 3 for deposit of outstanding tax/ interest/ penalty for which intimation under Section 200A has been given to the petitioner. The petitioner is only aggrieved of the notices issued by the respondent No. 3 under Section 226 (3) of the Income Tax Act calling upon the Jammu and Kashmir Bank, who holds money for and on account of the Assessee, to make the deposit of the o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o the Income Tax liability standing against the petitioner. The petitioner in this petition is seeking to contest the demand on merits, in that, it is argued on behalf of the petitioner that the entire Tax deducted at source stood deposited, and, therefore, the demand raised by the respondent no. 3 was non-est in the eye of law. Without going into the merits of the demand and adjudicating the disputed question of facts, we are of the view that the petitioner, if aggrieved by the intimation of demand issued by respondent no. 3 under Sub-Section 1 of Section 200A is well within its rights to file an appeal before the jurisdictional Commissioner (Appeals), and cannot straightway approach this Court by invoking its extraordinary writ jurisdicti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 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. In the instant case, the Act provides complete machinery for the assessment/re-assessment of tax, imposition of penalty and for obtaining relief in respect of any improper orders passed by the Revenue Authorities, and the Assesseee could not be permitted to abandon that machinery and to invoke the jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution when he had ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
