DRN. Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. The Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax CPC, Bengaluru / The Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (TDS) Circle 16(2), Bangalore
[Citation -2020-LL-0713-17]

Citation 2020-LL-0713-17
Appellant Name DRN. Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.
Respondent Name The Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax CPC, Bengaluru / The Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (TDS) Circle 16(2), Bangalore
Court HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 13/07/2020
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags demand notice • alternative remedy
Bot Summary: Y.V.Raviraj, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 would submit to this Court that the present writ petition is not maintainable as the petitioner has efficacious remedy of appeal under Section 246A of the Income Tax Act. He would also submit to this Court that unless petitioner s exhaust remedy of appeal he has no locus standi to question the demand notice and this Court cannot examine and review the demand notice which is not permissible under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. To this submission, counsel for the petitioner would request this Court to dispose of the writ petition reserving liberty to the petitioner to seek redressal of his grievance before the competent forum. Having taken note of the submissions made by learned counsel for the respondents and the petitioner, this Court is of the view that the present writ petition questioning the demand notice cannot be examined at this stage. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of reserving liberty to the petitioner to approach competent authority in accordance with law.


IN HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS 13th DAY OF JULY 2020 BEFORE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WP NO 146671 OF 2020 (T-IT) BETWEEN DRN. INFRASTRUCTURE PVT.LTD., 110 NAYAK HOUSE, GOKUL ROAD, DOLLARS COLONY, HUBBALLI-580030 DIST : DHARWAD REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR DINESH S/O. RAMACHANDRA NAYAK AGE : 53 YEARS, OCC : MANAGING DIRECTOR, R/O : NO.18, YASHODAN, ASHOK NAGAR, VIJAY NAGAR, HUBBALLI-580032, DIST : DHARWAD ... PETITIONER (BY SRI. ARUN L NEELOPANT, ADV.) AND 2 1. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC BENGALURU BENGALURU-560001 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONERR OF INCOME-TAX (TDS) CIRCLE 16(2), BANGALORE ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. Y V RAVIRAJ, ADV. FOR R1 & R2) THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION IN NATURE OF WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH IMPUGNED DEMAND NOTICE BEARING COMMUNICATION REFERENCE NO.CPC/1718/C94/1886051513 DATED:23.07.2019 PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.1 DIRECTING PETITIONER COMPANY TO REMIT ALLEGED OUTSTANDING TDS AMOUNT AS PER ANNEXURE-A. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, COURT MADE FOLLOWING: 3 ORDER top noted writ petition is filed by petitioner seeking writ of certiorari to quash impugned demand notice bearing Communication Reference No.CPC/1718/ C94/1886051513 dated:23.07.2019 passed by 1st respondent. 2. Sri. Y.V.Raviraj, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 would submit to this Court that present writ petition is not maintainable as petitioner has efficacious remedy of appeal under Section 246A of Income Tax Act. 3. He would also submit to this Court that unless petitioner s exhaust remedy of appeal he has no locus standi to question demand notice and this Court cannot examine and review demand notice which is not permissible under Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India. 4 4. To this submission, counsel for petitioner would request this Court to dispose of writ petition reserving liberty to petitioner to seek redressal of his grievance before competent forum. 5. Having taken note of submissions made by learned counsel for respondents and petitioner, this Court is of view that present writ petition questioning demand notice cannot be examined at this stage. 6. In that view of matter, writ petition is disposed of reserving liberty to petitioner to approach competent authority in accordance with law. SD/- JUDGE Vb/- DRN. Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax CPC, Bengaluru / Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (TDS) Circle 16(2), Bangalore
Report Error