9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (11) TMI 1391X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... MEGHALAYA HIGH COURT - 2024:MLHC:1087 - DB - MEGHALAYA HIGH COURT - HC - Dated:- 26-11-2024 - WP (C) No. 198/2024 with MC (WPC) No. 207/2024 - - - Income Tax - Exemption from income tax u/s 10(26) - Petitioner is working as Director in the department of Soil, Government of Meghalaya. She is a resident of Khasi Hills. She claims to be a member of the scheduled tribe as defined under Article 366(25) of the Constitution of India - Petitioner's withdrawal of application for revision under Section 264 - HELD THAT:- First of all, the Income Tax Act, 1961 provides very detailed machinery for investigation and determination of income and its assessment to tax. It also provides a structured system for assessment, preferment of appeal from such ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ustice And Hon ble Mr. Justice W. Diengdoh, Judge For the Petitioner : Ms. S. Parueen, Adv For the Respondents : Mr. S. Chetia, Adv for R/2 3 Mr. N. Syngkon, GA Mr. J.N. Rynjah, GA Mrs. P.D. Bajurbaruah, Sr.Adv with Mr. B.A. Wanswett, Adv for R/7 Mr. Gopal Chandra Roy, Adv for R/9 Mr. T.A. Sangma, Adv for R/10 JUDGMENT ( Per the Hon ble, the Chief Justice) (Oral) The facts as disclosed in the records are these. The petitioner is working as Director in the department of Soil, Government of Meghalaya. She is a resident of Khasi Hills. She claims to be a member of the scheduled tribe as defined under Article 366(25) of the Constitution of India, residing in the area in Part II of the table appended to paragraph 20 of the Sixth Schedule to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es a structured system for assessment, preferment of appeal from such assessment, revision and so on. The writ petitioner has to avail of that remedy which in our opinion is efficacious. Secondly, as a writ court we should not exercise jurisdiction to adjudicate upon highly disputed facts by evaluating very voluminous evidence, which is involved here. We find from the records (Annexure-18 at page 108 of the writ petition) that on 11th April, 2021 (the date appears to be wrong, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, it should be 16th April, 2022), the petitioner assessee filed an application for revision under Section 264 of the said Act for the assessment year 2014-15. On 9th June, 2022, she withdrew it. Now, learned counsel f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
