Shivashakti Industries v. The Commissioner of Income-tax, Hubli / The Income-tax Officer Ward-I, Gadag
[Citation -2020-LL-0911-82]

Citation 2020-LL-0911-82
Appellant Name Shivashakti Industries
Respondent Name The Commissioner of Income-tax, Hubli / The Income-tax Officer Ward-I, Gadag
Court HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 11/09/2020
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags alternative remedy • revision petition • charge of tax
Bot Summary: Aggrieved by the same, instead of preferring an appeal before the appropriate appellate Authority, the petitioner preferred revision petition before the 1st respondent which was rejected by the 1st respondent under the impugned order at Annexure-G dated 18.03.2009. Aggrieved by the impugned orders at Annexures-A and G, the petitioner is before this Court by way of present writ petition. Under these circumstances, the present writ petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to challenge Annexure-A by way of an appeal before the appellate Authority under Section 246 of the Act. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER a) This writ petition is hereby disposed of. B) Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to prefer an appeal against the impugned order datedat Annexure-A before the appropriate appellate Authority within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. D) The appellate Authority is directed to entertain the appeal to be filed by the petitioner without raising any objection on the point of limitation. 4 Subject to the aforesaid directions, the petition stands disposed of.


IN HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS 11th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2020 BEFORE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.63809/2010 (T-IT) BETWEEN M/S. SHIVASHAKTI INDUSTRIES C-7/8, KSSIDC ESTATE, GADAG, REP. BY ITS PARTNER SRI SHASHIKANT S/O SHIDRAMAPPA SANKANNAVAR, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS. ... PETITIONER (BY SRI. H.R.KAMBIYAVAR, ADVOCATE) AND 1. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, P.B. ROAD, NAVANAGAR, HUBLI-25. 2. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-I GADAG. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. TULAJAPPA KALBURGI, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT OF PROHIBITION OR DIRECTION IN NATURE OF WRIT OF PROHIBITION NOT TO ASSESS SUCH INCOME WHICH IS NOT RELATING TO YEAR IN QUESTION AS ASSESSED IN ASSESSEMENT ORDER DATED 28.02.2007 UNDER SECTION 143(3) READ WITH SECTION 148 PASSED BY 2ND RESPONDENT IN ANNEXURE-A WHICH IS BEYOND SCOPE OF INCOME AND CHARGE OF TAX AND ETC.. 2 THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINATY HEARING B GROUP, THIS DAY, COURT, MADE FOLLOWING: ORDER In this petition, petitioner is aggrieved by impugned assessment order at Annexure-A dated 28.02.2007 passed by 2nd respondent. Aggrieved by same, instead of preferring appeal before appropriate appellate Authority, petitioner preferred revision petition before 1st respondent which was rejected by 1st respondent under impugned order at Annexure-G dated 18.03.2009. Aggrieved by impugned orders at Annexures-A and G, petitioner is before this Court by way of present writ petition. 2. It is not in dispute that as against impugned orders at Annexure-A, petitioner is entitled to equally efficacious and alternative remedy of preferring appeal under Section 246 of 3 Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, Act ). Under these circumstances, present writ petition is disposed of permitting petitioner to challenge Annexure-A by way of appeal before appellate Authority under Section 246 of Act. 3. In result, I pass following: ORDER a) This writ petition is hereby disposed of. b) Liberty is reserved in favour of petitioner to prefer appeal against impugned order datedat Annexure-A before appropriate appellate Authority within period of thirty (30) days from date of receipt of certified copy of this order. c) If such appeal is filed, appellate Authority is directed to consider and dispose of said appeal in accordance with law. d) appellate Authority is directed to entertain appeal to be filed by petitioner without raising any objection on point of limitation. 4 Subject to aforesaid directions, petition stands disposed of. SD JUDGE JTR Shivashakti Industries v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Hubli / Income-tax Officer Ward-I, Gadag
Report Error