CW 6696/10 (1) In the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Jaipur Bench, Jaipur O R D E R S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6696/2010 Hemant K. Maloo Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(3), Alwar & Anr. Date Of Order :: 11/05/2010 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi Mr. Sanjay Jhanwar, for petitioner. Instant petition has been filed by the petitioner assailing the order dt.24.3.2010 passed by the Assessing Authority for the assessment year 2001-02 in exercise of powers U/s 179(1) of Income Tax Act,1961, which is indisputably a revisable order U/s 264 of the IT Act. It appears from the record that initially order u/s. 179(1) of the Act was passed by the Assessing Authority on 10.7.2009, which was challenged by the petitioner before the revisional authority u/s.264 of the Act, but when the revisional authority failed to decide the revision petition, the petitioner approached this Court by way of writ petition bearing No.9907/09, upon which this Court directed the revisional authority to decide the petition filed by the petitioner within 15 days. In compliance thereof, the revisional authority decided the CW 6696/10 (2) revision petition vide its order dt.17.9.09 (Ann.11) remitting the matter back to the Assessing Authority with certain directions to consider afresh in accordance with law. In compliance thereof, the Assessing Authority after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, passed order afresh u/s.179(1) of the Act dt.24.3.2010 (Ann.1), which has been assailed by the petitioner in the instant petition. Counsel submits that finding which has been recorded in treating M/s. Adity Ventures Ltd as Private Limited Company U/s 3(1)(iii) of the Companies Act is beyond the scope of provisions of the IT Act. Counsel has further tried to persuade this Court that the finding is wholly perverse which requires interference by this Court. Indisputably the order being revisable U/s 264 of the Act; however, the submissions made before this Court are available for the petitioner to raise before the revisional authority, who is supposed to examine the same on merits while deciding the revision petition, if any preferred by the petitioner. In view of efficacious remedy of revision available to the petitioner u/s. 264 CW 6696/10 (3) of the Act, this Court is not inclined to exercise its inherent powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Consequently, the petition fails and is hereby dismissed. (Ajay Rastogi),J. VS Shekhawat/p.3/ 6696cw10May11Fnl.doc