M/S ED MOHAMMAD NIZAMUDDIN V. INCOME TAX OFFICER ANR

CW/6794/2015

AI Insights

The case involves M/s. Ed Mohammad Nizamuddin challenging an assessment order dated 31-3-2015 passed by the Income Tax Officer (TDS)-3 Jaipur under Sections 206C(6A) and 206C(7) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The respondent's counsel argued that the order is appealable under Section 246A of the Act, which was amended by the Finance Act, 2015, effective from 1-6-2015. The petitioner had already filed an appeal against the order, which was acknowledged by the court. The court decided not to entertain the writ petition, emphasizing the availability of an alternative statutory remedy and directed the appellate authority to expedite the decision on both the appeal and the interim protection application.

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 760238 (HC-RAJASTHAN)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 09-09-2015
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: R B MATHUR
• Assessee Lawyers: MAHENDRA GARGIEYA
• Keywords: Alternative remedy; Assessment Order; Income Tax; Statutory Appeal; Writ petition
• Section: 246A; 206C(7); 206C(6A)

Judgement Text

"1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH ORDER M/s.Ed Mohammad Nizamuddin Vs. Income Tax Officer (TDS)-2 Jaipur & Another (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6794/2015) Date of Order: September 09, 2015. PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SHARMA Mr. Mahendra Gargieya, for the petitioner. Mr. R.B. Mathur, for respondents. BY THE COURT: A challenge has been made to the assessment order dated 31- 3-2015 passed by Income Tax Officer (TDS)-3 Jaipur passed under Section 206C(6A)/ 206C(7) Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter `the Act of 1961'). Mr. R.B. Mathur appearing on behalf of respondent department has taken a preliminary objection to the very maintainability of the writ petition, and submitted that as the impugned order is amenable to a remedy of appeal under Section 246A of the Act of 1961, the petition not be entertained. He has further submitted that in fact such an appeal against the impugned order dated 31-3-2015 has been filed by the petitioner before the 2 appellate authority. Counsel for the petitioner fairly concedes that an appeal against the impugned order dated 31-3-2015 has been filed. He however expressed his apprehension as to whether the order of assessment under Section 206C(6A)/ 206C(7) of the Act of 1961 is amenable to appeal. That however is negated by a categorical submission of the counsel for the respondent department that the order dated 31-3-2015 is appellable order in view of the plain language of Section 246A of the Act of 1961. Reference for the purpose has been made to Section 246A of the Income Tax Act as amended effective 1-6-2015, by the Finance Act, 2015 whereunder an appeal at the instance of “Any Collector”, as the petitioner is aggrieved of an order of assessment is maintainable. In the facts above and submissions made, I would be disinclined to entertain the writ petition and dismiss it for reason of availability of alternative remedy of statutory appeal. At this stage, counsel for the petitioner has prayed for an interim protection till disposal of the statutory appeal against the impugned order of assessment dated 31-3-2015. I am, however, not inclined to entertain the prayer of the petitioner. It is an admitted fact that along with an appeal under Section 246A of the Act of 1961 an application for interim protection has also been filed before 3 the Appellate Authority. It is for the petitioner to pursue the said appeal and application for interim protection. The appellate Authority is, however, directed to address and decide the application for interim protection filed by the petitioner along with the appeal against the impugned order dated 31-3-2015 within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. The appeal filed by the petitioner against the impugned order dated 31-3-2015 itself be decided within a period of six months thereafter. The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. (Alok Sharma), J. arn/ 4 All corrections made in the order have been incorporated in the order being emailed. Arun Kumar Sharma, Private Secretary. "