Case Law Details
Sak Industries Pvt Ltd Vs. DCIT (Delhi High Court)
The petitioner assessee had filed an appeal against the reassessment order as it was mandated and required to be filed within the period of limitation. They have, however, withdrawn the said appeal. Looking into the factual background of the present case, we feel that the plea of alternative remedy raised by the Revenue should be and ought to be rejected. Defence of alternative remedy in the present case will result in miscarriage of justice and cause prejudice to the petitioner.
Once we have quashed the order dated 2nd November, 2010, for the reasons stated above, the petitioner should not be denied relief on the ground that the respondent No. 1 had proceeded in great haste and hurry to pass the reassessment order. In the present case, therefore, quashing of order dated 2nd November, 2010 would necessarily entail and as a sequitor mandate quashing of the reassessment order dated 19th November, 2010. Existence of alternative remedy, therefore, cannot be regarded as equally efficacious and adequate. The petitioner has not tried to circumvent the statutory right to appeal or alternative remedy. Challenge to reopening of assessments has been entertained and examined in writ proceedings when existence of jurisdictional precondition is in issue/question. Existence of alternative remedy is not an absolute bar to relief under Article 226 but essentially a rule of policy, convenience and discretion. When there is a violation of principles of natural justice or the procedure required for the decision is not adopted, the writ court can exercise their discretionary jurisdiction of judicial review. In the present case, we are satisfied that there has been miscarriage of justice and the respondent No. 1 has proceeded with the reassessment proceedings with undesirable haste and hurry, in violation of principles of natural justice and contrary to the procedure mandated.
13. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, we also quash the re assessment order dated 19.11.2010.
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
