AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
V.V.S. Rao, J.—In these writ petitions, the petitioners are assessees on the file of the first respondent. They filed their IT returns for the asst. yr. 2002-03. Nevertheless the second respondent, purporting to exercise power under s. 147 of the IT Act, 1961 (''the Act''), issued a notice under s. 148 thereof proposing to undertake reassessment on the allegation that the income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment within the meaning of s. 147 of the Act. Being aggrieved by these notices, various assessees filed these writ petitions.
This Court admitted all the cases and passed interim orders on condition of payment of 50 per cent of the tax with a default clause. When these writ petitions were listed before this Bench on 29th Jan., 2011 it was brought to the notice of this Court that, after receiving the impugned notices under s. 148 of the Act, all the petitioners had filed their replies enclosing copies of the returns for the asst. yr. 2002-03 raising objections for reassessment. Today it is also brought to our notice that in all these matters assessment orders were passed under s. 147 r/w s. 143(3) of the Act and that they have already preferred appeals under s. 246 of the Act to the CIT(A), Hyderabad. To that effect, a statement is also filed. As assessment orders have already been filed, and the petitioners already availed the effective statutory remedy available under the Act, it would not be proper for us to express any opinion on the merits of the case either in relation to the exercise of jurisdiction under s. 147 or s. 143(3) of the Act. We leave open all the issues raised in these cases which can also be raised along with the grounds of appeal before the CIT(A), Hyderabad.
In view of the above, these writ petitions are dismissed as infructuous giving liberty to the petitioners to raise all grounds available under law before the appellate authority, if the appeals are still pending. There shall be no order as to costs.