IN HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (T) No. 6259 of 2018 M/s Badrinath Sales Pvt. Ltd., Company incorporated under Companies Act 1956, having its office at Main Road, Adityapur, Saraikela Kharswan, PO & PS Adityapur, Distt. Saraikela Kharswan through one of its Directors Sri Krishna Agarwal, S/o Sri Maliram Agarwal, R/o Sanjay Nagar, Majhi Tola, Adityapur, near A.S.N. School, PO & PS Adityapur, Distt. Saraikela Kharswan Petitioner Versus 1. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Ranchi having its office at 5, Main Road, PO & PS Chutia, Distt. Ranchi 2. Commissioner of Income Tax, Jamshedpur having its office at 2 Bagmati Road, PO Jamshedpur (Head Office), PS Bistupur, Town Jamshedpur, Distt. East Singhbhum 3. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Jamshedpur, PO & PS Bistupur, Distt. East Singhbhum Respondents CORAM : HON BLE CHIEF JUSTICE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI For Petitioner : Mr. Nitin Kr. Pasari, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Rahul Lamba, Advocate Order No. 04 : Dated 20th February, 2019 Aniruddha Bose, CJ. present writ petition has been instituted by writ petitioner assessee questioning, in substance, re-assessment order passed under Section 147 read with Section 148 of Income Act, 1961 for Assessment Year 2012-13. writ petition was instituted on 7th December, 2018 at time of reopening of assessment after filing of objection against notice of re-assessment. During pendency of writ petition, order has been passed on 20th December, 2018 in such proceeding. This order has been brought on record by way of interlocutory application registered as I.A. No. 308 of 2019. In interlocutory application said assessment order is also under challenge along with initiation of penalty proceeding under Section 271(1)(c) of Act. petitioner, in fact, has asked for amendment of writ petition. On behalf of Income Tax Authorities, Mr. Lamba has raised preliminary point that re-assessment order is appealable order under Section 246(1)(b) of Act and hence writ petition ought not to be entertained. Mr. Pasari s stand on other hand is that writ petition was instituted at time when re-assessment order was not there and he has relied on decision of Honb e Supreme Court in case of Income Tax Officer Ward No. 16(2) Vs. M/s Tech Span India Private Ltd. & Anr. reported in (2018) 6 SCC 685. His main case is that notice of re-assessment did not record any cogent reason which could be foundation of belief of assessing officer that any sum had escaped assessment. Secondly his submission is that proceeding was time barred and re-assessment was sought to be made only on basis of change of opinion. According to him, same issue was examined in original assessment order. We have already observed that order in re-assessment proceeding has been passed and there is provision for appeal under Act. There is no allegation of violation of principle of natural justice which could have prompted us to invoke our constitutional writ jurisdiction straightaway dealing with appealable order. But since there is appellate provision where all points which are being raised in this writ petition can be raised, we are of opinion that matter should be examined in appeal. It was submission of Mr. Pasari that recovery proceeding has already been initiated. We give liberty to writ petitioner to institute appeal and in event it wants operation of re-assessment order to be stayed it shall make payment of pre-deposit amount. present writ petition stands disposed of in above terms. connected application (I.A. No. 308 of 2019) shall also stand disposed of, as we have disposed of main petition. (Aniruddha Bose, C.J.) (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) AKT Badrinath Sales Pvt. Ltd. v. Principal Commissioner of Income-tax, Ranchi / Commissioner of Income-tax, Singhbhum / Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-2, Singhbhum