Wtax/872/2017 Of Shri Satish Mahana v. Income Tax Officer-1 4

Hon'ble Bharati Sapru,J.Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J. A short counter affidavit and Rejoinder Affidavit filed today is taken on record. Heard Sri Abhinav Mehrotra, learned Counsel for the petitioner and SriShubham Agrawal, learned Counsel for the respondent-department. The petitioner has filed the present petition being aggrieved by a noticeunder Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 31.03.2017 as well asan order of assessment 20.12.2017 passed by the respondents for re-assessment of the Income Tax for the Assessment Year 2010-2011. The facts on record do not show any exceptional circumstances wherethis petition should be entertained under Article 226 of the Constitution ofIndia especially in view of the fact that the petitioner has a remedy offiling an appeal under the Act itself. It is the settled view of the courts that normally it is the statutory remedy,which should be availed of unless any exceptional circumstances areshown to exist where the statutory remedy is to be by-passed. In thiscase the petitioner avers that the reasons that were recorded were notissued to him. The record on the other-hand reflects that the petitionerwas not co-operating with the department and had shown three differentnames at three different places. The reasons had been recorded theyhave been sent to him as stated in the counter affidavit filed by thedepartment. In view of the above, we are not inclined to interfere at this stage. It isopen to the petitioner to take recourse to the statutory remedy availableto him under the Act. This petition is dismissed. No costs. Order Date :- 16.1.2018S.P.