9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (2) TMI 244X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessing officer, it would not be fair to raise such an objection in Writ Petition for the first time to challenge the validity of the reassessment proceedings. Petitioner has filed undated letters to show that the issue of Section 54F was examined during the assessment proceedings and, therefore, there is a change of opinion. In the annexure to the queries raised, there is no query concerning Section 54F or taxation of rental income. Whether these undated letters were filed or not during the assessment proceedings in the absence of any document acknowledging the same by the revenue, it would not be proper for us to enter the arena of investigating this issue as to whether these documents were filed or not. This would involve an investigation into the facts that this Court, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, cannot examine. However, the petitioner is free to demonstrate the same in appeal. Issue of rental income under the house property is concerned, no query is raised, and even in the undated letters, there is no reply on this issue. Therefore, we cannot accept the petitioner's contention that this issue was examined during the assessment proceedings. Learned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... judicate the appeal
Ad-interim relief extended for four weeks from the date of uploading the present order to enable the petitioner to make an appropriate application before the appropriate Authority for seeking a stay of the demand. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... m house property" amounting to Rs. 46,85,625/- and disallowance of deduction under Section 54F to the extent of Rs. 3,86,95,545/-. The income was reassessed at Rs. 10,86,36,149/- and a demand of Rs. 2,65,22,019/- came to be raised. 8. Instead of filing an appeal, the petitioner approached this Court through the present petition on 27 April 2022, challenging the reassessment order and notice of demand dated 29 March 2022. On 20 September 2022, this Court granted ad-interim relief, which continues to date. It is against this backdrop that the present petitioner is before us. Submission of the Petitioner: 9. Mr. Padvekar, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the impugned notice under Section 148 has been issued beyond a period of 4 years from the end of the relevant assessment year. Since there is no failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for the assessment, the impugned proceedings are barred by the first proviso to Section 147 of the Act as it existed at the relevant time. Learned counsel further submitted that both these issues were examined during the assessment proceeding and, therefore, the impugned proceeding would amount to a change of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution, cannot delve into disputed questions of facts. He submits that all these issues can be examined in the appeal, the same being an alternate and efficacious remedy under the Act. Analysis:- 12. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent and have perused the documents annexed to the petition. 13. At the outset, in the petition, the petitioner has only stated that he has no other efficacious alternate remedy except by way of this writ petition. In our view, this statement is not correct. Against the reassessment order passed there is an appeal provided under Chapter XX of the Act and this fact has been communicated to the petitioner in the notice of demand dated 29 March 2022 itself. We may also note that for filing an appeal, there is no provision under the Income-tax Act of any pre-deposit for entertaining and adjudicating the appeals. Therefore, merely because a demand is raised it does not mean that the Writ Court should entertain the writ when there is an alternate and efficacious remedy available by way of appeal under the Act. We have recently in the case of Oberoi Constructions Limited Vs. Union ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of law, then certainly, reopening can be done. The issue in the present case, whether it is a question of fact or a question of law, will have to be examined in the light of the submissions made during the course of the assessment proceedings, which would again involve the determination of questions of fact, which this Court cannot go into in writ proceedings. In any view, the reasons recorded do not mention the reopening being done based on audit objections. Therefore, we have our own doubts about whether the petitioner can raise this issue. Also, we cannot comprehend how internal audit objection documents were shared with the petitioner. 19. On perusal of the letter filed on 17 August 2018, in response to the audit party's query, we find various documents annexed to this letter. Prima facie, we do not find a reference to these documents in undated letters, which the petitioner claims to have filed in assessment proceedings. 20. The petitioner's last submission that the impugned order is contrary to the decision of this Court in the case of Asian Paints (Supra) can be examined by the Appellate Authority, which has the power to adjudicate upon the same and the consequences there ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... owever, liberty is given to raise this issue in appeal. 23. Given the above, we refrain from exercising our jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. However, if the petitioner files an appeal against the assessment order dated 29 March 2022 within four weeks from the date of uploading of the present order, then, the Appellate Authority will adjudicate the appeal without any issue as to limitation since the petitioner had approached this Court within one month from the date of passing of the impugned order and the petition was pending in this Court since then and the petitioner was bona fidely pursuing the said petition. 24. We may also further observe that this Court had granted ad-interim relief on 20 September 2022. We extend the said ad-interim relief for four weeks from the date of uploading the present order to enable the petitioner to make an appropriate application before the appropriate Authority for seeking a stay of the demand. 25. If such an application is made, the appropriate Authority would examine and decide on its own merits without getting influenced by any of our observations made in the present order. 26. We also make it clear that the pet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
