K.J. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.340 OF 2008 Panchratna Co-operative Housing Society Ltd., ..Petitioners Versus The Assessing Officer 16(1) & Ors...Respondents ---- Mr.F.B.Andhyorajina Sr.Counsel with Ms.Pallavi Divekar for the petitioners. Mr.P.S.Sahadevan for respondents. ---- Coram : F.I.Rebello & R.S.Mohite,JJ Coram : F.I.Rebello & R.S.Mohite,JJ Coram : F.I.Rebello & R.S.Mohite,JJ Date : 12.03.2008. PC 1. Rule. Heard forthwith. 2. The petitioners have approached this Court for reopening of the assessment pursuant to the notice issued under section 148 for the A.Y.2000-2001, 2001-2002 and regular assessment under 143 for A.Y.2005-2006. The A.O. has proceeded on the footing that the petitioners are not a society registered under the Societies Registration Act i.e. on the basis of communication dated 14.8.2007 issued by the Asstt.Registrar, Co-operative Societies S-Ward, Konkan Bhavan, pursuant to the letter by the respondents. We have perused the contents of said communication. What we find from the said communication is that the concerned officer : 2 : expressed his inability to issue copy of the certificate as at the relevant time the office was not in existence. We find that at the instance of respondents, the sub-registrar by communication dated 15.6.2007 had informed the A.O. that the registration number of Pancharatna Co-operative Society is BOM/HSG/9094/1981 and that is registered. The copy of the bye-laws was also forwarded as also auditors report. Apart from that the petitioners have produced the Gazated notification wherein the registration of the society has been published. The date of publication of the gazatte is 7.4.1983 and the certificate is of 16.11.1981. It is therefore, clear that the society was registered as far back as on 16.11.1981 with the Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies under the provisions of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act. 2. On behalf of the respondents, learned Counsel contended that appeal has been preferred against the order of the A.O. and therefore, this Court should not exercise its extra ordinary jurisdiction. Ordinarily, we would have refused to interfere as there is alternative remedy available to the petitioners. However, in the instant case we find that though the A.O.had with him the bye-laws of the society, the intimation by the Assstt. Registrar that the society was registered and other evidence, has proceeded to pass an order. In our opinion, : 3 : this would be a fit case where this Court inspite of the fact that appeal is pending, exercise its extra ordinary jurisdiction. 3. In the light of the above, rule made absolute in terms of prayer clauses-(a) and (b). The matter restored to file of A.O. for re-consideration of the issue afresh on the basis that the petitioner is a registered co-operative society, in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs. (R.S.Mohite,J) (F.I.Rebello,J) (R.S.Mohite,J) (F.I.Rebello,J) (R.S.Mohite,J) (F.I.Rebello,J)