Khemchand Uttamchand Bhojwani Vs ACIT (Bombay High Court)
The Bombay High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging an assessment order dated 29 May 2024 and the related show cause notices, holding that the petitioner had an effective and adequate alternate statutory remedy by way of appeal. The Court noted that the petition contained omnibus assertions claiming absence of any efficacious remedy, which were found to be incorrect, as the availability of an appellate remedy had been expressly communicated to the petitioner through the demand notice. The Court observed that reliance on a Supreme Court decision was made without demonstrating similarity of facts or applicability.
Read SC Judgment: Reassessments Quashed Due to Lack of Year-Specific Seized Material: SC
The petitioner argued that appellate proceedings are time-consuming and that authorities generally insist on a pre-deposit of 20% of the tax demand for interim relief, contending that these factors justified invoking writ jurisdiction. The Court rejected these grounds, holding that writ jurisdiction cannot be used to bypass statutory remedies or pre-deposit requirements, nor can it be invoked merely because writ petitions may be decided faster than appeals. The Court also noted suppression of the demand notice by the petitioner.
On the allegation of breach of natural justice, the Court clarified that the case did not involve absence of notice or opportunity but at best raised issues of adequacy of notice or opportunity, which would require examination of factual aspects. Such issues, the Court held, do not constitute extraordinary circumstances warranting deviation from the settled rule of exhausting alternate remedies. Relying on its earlier decision, the Court declined to entertain the petition, left all contentions open for consideration by the appellate authority, and dismissed the petition without costs, granting liberty to pursue the statutory appeal.
