IMPORTANT POINT
The High Court will not entertain a writ petition if an effective alternative remedy exists, emphasizing the need to exhaust statutory remedies before seeking judicial intervention.

JUDGMENT :

Heard Mr. P.B. Paul, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. S. Chetia, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing For the Income Tax Department. Both the counsels have appeared before this Court through the Video Conferencing facility made available by the Registry of this Court.

2. This writ petition is directed against the Assessment Order dated 31.03.2022, whereby for the Assessment Year 2017, proceedings initiated under Section 147 pursuant to issuance of notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act the assessment was completed by the Assessment Officer in respect of the petitioner and a total amount of Rs. 3,17,17,890/-(Rupees Three Crore Seventeen Lakhs Seventeen Thousand Eight Hundred and Ninety) including tax, interest and penalty were found to be chargeable against the writ petitioner and a Demand Notice to that effect was raised.

3. The petitioner, aggrieved by the Assessment Order filed an appeal before the Commissioner’s Office and the counsel for the petitioner states that the appeal is presently pending but no effective order has been passed thereon. Under such circumstances, the writ petition has been filed praying for setting aside the Assessment Order dated 31.03.2022 as well as the consequential Demand Notice.

4. Learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department, Mr. S. Chetia, submits that since there is already an appeal which is preferred against the Assessment Order and the same is presently pending, the writ petition ought not to have been filed by the petitioner as he had already taken recourse to the statutory alternative remedy prescribed. Under such circumstances it is submitted that during the currency of the appeal where no order has been passed, writ petition is not maintainable and the same should, therefore, be dismissed as it is devoid of any merit.

5. Learned counsels for the parties have been heard and pleadings have been carefully perused.

6. The Department has also filed the affidavit and submitted that the appeal is pending and during the pendency of the appeal the writ petition ought not be entertained.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner on the other hand also urges before the Court that the petitioner is an indigenous person belonging to a declared Scheduled Tribe of the State of Nagaland, namely Khiamniungan (Naga) Tribe. He submits that the petitioner is a permanent resident of Noklak who is working for profit in the business of Hardware and Food-grains. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also referred to the certificate of Scheduled Tribe issued by the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Noklak. It is submitted that the petitioner is exempted from payment of Income Tax under Section 10(26) of the Income Tax Act. Learned counsel, therefore, submits that the assessment in the first place ought not to have been proceeded against the petitioner as he is a member of a Scheduled Tribe belonging to the State of Nagaland and which fact is not disputed by the respondents. He, therefore, submits that under such circumstances he has challenged the Assessment Order dated 31.03.2022, whereby the Assessing Officer completed assessment under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act read with Section 144B.

8. Be that as it may, learned counsel for the petitioner does not dispute his averments made in the writ petition that the petitioner has already availed of the statutory remedy of preferring an appeal before the Statutory Authority, namely the Commissioner (Appeals) of the Department and the present appeal is still pending. Such averments and contentions raised before the Court by the petitioner are also not disputed by the learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the Income Tax Department.

9. The Income Tax Act, 1961 is a complete code in itself against the Assessment Orders passed by the appropriate Assessing Authority. There is a provision for filing an appeal before the Appellate Authority, namely the jurisdictional Commissioner (Appeals). As is evident from the pleadings