Case Law Details
Chandran Sarath Vs ACIT (Kerala High Court)
Introduction: The case of Chandran Sarath Vs ACIT pertains to an assessment under the Income Tax Act, 1961, where the petitioner, engaged in cashew trading, contested an assessment order for the assessment year 2015-16. Despite filing an appeal, the petitioner sought relief through a writ petition before the Kerala High Court. This article examines the judgment of the High Court regarding the dismissal of the writ petition and the availability of alternative remedies.
Detailed Analysis:
1. Assessment and Appeal: The assessment for the year in question was completed under relevant sections of the Income Tax Act, leading to a demand for tax and penalty. Dissatisfied with the assessment, the petitioner filed an appeal before the appropriate authority, seeking redressal.
2. Dismissal of Appeal: Despite the petitioner’s efforts, the appeal was dismissed by the concerned authority. Subsequently, the petitioner approached the Kerala High Court through a writ petition, challenging the assessment order.
3. High Court’s Decision: The Kerala High Court, in its judgment, highlighted the existence of an alternative remedy available to the petitioner. It noted that the petitioner could file a second appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), providing a legal recourse for addressing grievances related to the assessment order.
4. Availability of Equally Efficacious Remedy: Emphasizing the principle of exhaustion of alternative remedies, the High Court dismissed the writ petition. It reasoned that since a statutory remedy in the form of a second appeal before ITAT was available, there was no ground to entertain the writ petition.
5. Legal Implications: The judgment underscores the importance of adhering to established legal procedures and exhausting available remedies before seeking extraordinary relief through writ petitions. It reaffirms the significance of specialized tribunals like ITAT in addressing tax-related disputes.
Conclusion: The dismissal of the writ petition in the case of Chandran Sarath Vs ACIT by the Kerala High Court underscores the significance of pursuing available legal remedies exhaustively. By highlighting the existence of an equally efficacious remedy before ITAT, the High Court reaffirmed the principle of exhaustion of remedies and upheld the established legal process for addressing grievances under the Income Tax Act, 1961.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF KERALA HIGH COURT
The petitioner is an assessee under the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the Rules made thereunder. The petitioner is engaged in the business of buying and selling of cashew, in the name and style of Sree Bhadra Cashew Company. The assessment for the assessment year 2015-16 was completed under Section 147 read with Sections 144 and 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on 22.03.2022. As per the assessment order, the gross income, which escaped assessment was Rs.2,08,64,696/-, on which tax and penalty etc., has been demanded.
2. Aggrieved by the said assessment order, the petitioner has filed Ext.P2 appeal before the 2nd respondent. The appeal has been dismissed vide Ext.P3 order. There is a remedy of filing 2nd appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, against the said impugned order.
3. This Court finds no ground to entertain this writ petition inasmuch as there is equally efficacious remedy available to the petitioner of filing the 2nd appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.
Thus, the writ petition is dismissed, leaving it open to the petitioner to avail the statutory remedy of 2nd appeal, if he is so advised.
Author Bio
