Munish Bajaj And Sons Huf v. The Deputy Director Of Income Tax (Investigation), Panipat And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA|AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 7746 of 2018 (O&M) Date of decision: 20.7.2018 Munish Bajaj and Sons HUF. — Petitioner VSThe Deputy Director of Income Tax (Investigation),Panipat and others.. Respondents Coram:Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh BindalHon'ble Mr. Justice Deepak Sibal Present:Mr. Pawan Kumar Mutneja, Advocate, for the petitioner. Rajesh Bindal, J. By filing the present writ petition challenge has been made tothe notice dated 30.3.2017 (Annexure P-3) issued under Section 148 of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 and consequent order of assessment dated29.12.2017 (Annexure P-8). In para no. 15 (g)(i) of the petition, a wrong statement has beenmade that there is no alternative remedy of appeal or revision available tothe petitioner against the impugned order as in para no. 15(g)(j), it has beenmentioned that the petitioner has already preferred an appeal against theimpugned order before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). On 28.3.2018, the Court passed the following order:- “At the petitioner's request, adjourned to 1904.2018. In the meantime, the petitioner is at liberty to filean appeal against the order without prejudice to this writpetition.” It is not in dispute that the petitioner has already preferredappeal against the impugned order, which is pending. Since the petitioner has already impugned the order by filingappeal, without opining on the merits of the controversy, the present writpetition is dismissed, leaving the petitioner to pursue his appeal. (Rajesh Bindal)Judge 20.7 2018VS (Deepak Sibal)Judge Whether speaking/ reasonedWhether Reportable Yes/NoYes/No