Law:

Section:

Article 226 of the Constitution of India - Writ - Maintainability of - Tribunal rejected assessee's claim for allowance under sections 35C and 280ZC as these were not mooted before AAC and did not arise from his order - Assessee moved, under article 226, to High Court against Tribunal's order and also contended for first time that there was misapplication of rule 8 by ITO - Whether Tribunal rightly dismissed appeal and assessee could not be allowed to raise impugned questions in writ - Held, yes Facts The Tribunal refused to consider the assessee's fresh claim for allowance under sections 35C and 280ZC as these claims were not made before the AAC, nor in the return. The Tribunal held that these questions did not arise from the AAC's order. The assessee moved the Court under article 226 against the Tribunal's order and also for the first time contended that rule 8 had been misapplied in its case. The first Court dismissed the writ holding, inter alia, that the Income-tax Act, 1961 was a complete code in itself and the appellant should not be allowed to abandon the remedies provided in the Income-tax Act and held to be entitled to the relief under the constitutional writ jurisdiction. On appeal : Held The questions of allowance under sections 35C and 280ZC were not mooted before the AAC and did not arise from the order of the latter. The Tribunal refused to consider the same on that ground. The misapplication of rule 8 was not even argued before the Tribunal and had been taken for the first time before the High Court. In that view of the matter, it could not be said that the Tribunal exceeded or wrongly exercised its jurisdiction. The Tribunal was within its jurisdiction not to entertain the contentions as the same had not been mooted earlier. It was open to the assessee to come up by way of reference so that the questions arising out of the order of the Tribunal could be properly adjudicated. The assessee not having chosen to do so, could not raise these questions in an application under article 226. Accordingly, the writ was dismissed. Cases referred to Smt. Ujjam Bai v. State of Uttar Pradesh AIR 1962 SC 1621, Bhopal Sugar Industries Ltd. v. D.P. Dub'ey, STO…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492