IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD MARCH 2010 / 12TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 3334 of 2010(N) ------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- K.P.ABDUL MAJEED, "SONA", KOTTARAM ROAD, CALICUT. BY ADV. SRI.P.RAGHUNATH SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN SMT.K.B.SUBHAGAMANI RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1 (1): CALICUT. 2. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CALICUT. BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, INCOME TAX. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. .............................................................................. W.P.(C) No. 3334 of 2010 ......................................................................... Dated this the 3rd March, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is challenging Ext. P12 order of assessment passed by the Income TAx authorities. The challenge is raised on many a ground, legal as well as factual. 2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that there is absolutely no justification for issuance of Ext. P1 notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act and that the entire proceedings are vitiated on many a reason as clearly explained in the Writ Petition. 3. The respondents have filed a statement rebutting the averments raised in the Writ Petition and also seeking to sustain Ext. P12 order. It is also made a mention therein that the petitioner is very much having a remedy by way of appeal. This Court finds that the submission made from the part of the respondents as to the alternate remedy is correct and W.P.(C) No. 3334 of 2010 2 sustainable. More so , in view of the law declared by the Apex Court in C.A. Abraham and Income Tax Officer, Kottayam and another ( AIR 1961 SC 609) holding that the statute itself provides adequate remedy by way of appeal to the Tribunal and that the appellant could not be permitted to invoke the jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India . 4. Following the dictum as aforesaid, interference is declined. The petitioner is permitted to pursue the remedy available under the statute, i.e. by way of appeal. If any such appeal is filed within three weeks from today, the same shall be caused to be entertained and appropriate orders shall be passed, as expeditiously as possible. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. lk