Petitioner challenged an assessment order under the Income Tax Act, 1961 via writ petition. The court held the order was appealable and dismissed the petition on grounds of alternative remedy.
Writ petition dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 35
Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 127 of 2019
Petitioner :- Bhoop Ram Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Neeraj Kumar,Ashish Kumar,Jalaj Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Bharati Sapru,J. Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J.
Heard Sri J.K. Tripathi, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Manu Ghildyal, learned Counsel for the respondents.
By means of the present writ petition the petitioner has challenged the order dated 20.12.2018 passed by the respondent no.2 under Section 144/147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2011-12.
Learned Counsel for the respondent has raised an objection that this writ petition is not maintainable as the order under challenge is appellable one and also placed reliance on the judgement of Hon'ble Apex in the case of Authorised Officer, State Bank of Travancore and Ors. Vs. Mathew K.C. reported in (2018) 3 Supreme Court Cases 85 . The aforesaid fact could not be disputed by the Counsel for the petitioner.
In view of the above facts and circumstances, the order dated 20.12.2018 is an appellable order under the Act. The petitioner has an alternative remedy of filing an appeal. It is open to the petitioner to pursue his remedy available under the Act.
This writ petition is dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy.
Order Date :- 1.2.2019 S.P.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a writ petition challenging an assessable order under Section 144/147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is maintainable when an alternative statutory appeal is available.
Whether the existence of an appeal remedy bars the filing of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Authorised Officer, State Bank of Travancore and Ors. Vs. Mathew K.C.Referred¶8
(2018) 3 Supreme Court Cases 85
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Bhoop Ram
State Of U.P.
Another
Bharati Sapru
Piyush Agrawal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
