Cwjc/2125/2020 Of Satyendra Kumar Construction Pvt. Ltd v. Commissioner Of Income Tax-Ii

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNACivil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2125 of 2020 ====================================================== Satyendra Kumar Construction Pvt. Ltd. A Private Limited Companyincorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 having its Office at 202, HearEnclave New Dak Bunglow Road Patna- 800001 through its Director DipakKumar son of Shri. Narayan Prasad resident of Opp. Patel Hostel, BhiknaPahari, P.O. Mahendru P.S. Pirbahore, Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1.Commissioner of Income Tax-II Having its office at Central RevenueBuilding, Bir Chand Patel Path, Patna.Building, Bir Chand Patel Path, Patna. 2.Joint Commissioner of Income Tax Range II, Patna. 3.Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle II, Patna. 4.Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle II, Patna. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :For the Petitioner/s: Mr.D.V.Pathy, Advocate. For the Respondent/s: Mrs.Archana Sinha @ Archana Shahi, Advocate. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAHORAL ORDERORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 231-01-2020Petitioner has prayed for the following relief(s) “(i) The notice dated 31.03.2017 (as contained inAnnexure-11 series) for the Assessment Year 2010-11 issued by the respondent no. 4 under Section 148of the Income Tax Act, 1961 be quashed. (ii) The order dated 22.11.2019 (as contained inAnnexure-16 series) for the Assessment Year 2010-11 passed by the respondent no. 4 under Section 148of the Income Tax Act, 1961 be quashed. (iii) The notice of demand dated 22.11.2019 (ascontained in Annexure-16 series) for the AssessmentYear 2010-11 passed by the respondent no. 4 under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 bequashed. (iv) For granting any other relief (s) to which thepetitioner is otherwise found entitled to.” Mr. D.V.Pathy, learned counsel for the petitioner,states that the impugned order dated 22.11.2019 passed in thecase of the petitioner under Sections 143(3)/147 of the IncomeTax Act, 1961 pursuant to the assessment year 2010-11 was notsubject matter of challenge in any of the writ petitionsinstituted/pending/disposed of, before this Court. Statement taken on record. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, weare of the considered view that the attending facts would notwarrant us to interfere with the impugned order dated22.11.2019 passed by the respondent no. 4, the AssistantCommissioner of Income Tax. More so, when the petitioner hasgot an equally efficacious remedy provided under the provisionsof Income Tax Act, 1961 wherein all pleas, including that oflimitation, can be conveniently raised. As such, we dispose of the present petition reservingliberty to the petitioner to take appropriate steps in accordancewith law. Mrs. Archana Shahi, learned counsel for the sujit/- U respondents, states that as and when petitioner were to exhaustremedies expeditiously and within a period of four weeks fromtoday, the issue of limitation shall not be raised nor would comein the way of the petitioner having the matter concluded onmerits. Statement accepted and taken on record. (Sanjay Karol, CJ) ( Mohit Kumar Shah, J)