THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.33791 of 2010 July 26, 2011 Between: Maytax Infra Ltd., Begumpet, Hyderabad, represented by its General Manager (Legal & Contracts) … Petitioner And The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-I, Hyderabad And others ... Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.33791 of 2010 ORDER: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice V.V.S.Rao) The petitioner, an incorporated entity, is an assessee in the territorial limits of the second respondent. For the assessment year 2003-04, they filed return. They declared Rs.36,25,897/- as income. It appears that they also filed minimum alternative tax under Section 115JB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). The return was scrutinized under Section 143(3) of the Act making additions and determining the income at Rs.10,07,36,280/-. In appeal, the petitioner got part relief and the income stood reduced to Rs.5,48,58,666/-. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred second appeal, which is pending before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench. The first respondent issued notice under Section 148 of the Act proposing to reassess the income. After receiving notice, the petitioner filed return of income repeating the same income as originally declared and also requested the first respondent to furnish reasons which were furnished. The petitioner then filed objections on 22.10.2010. Even before they could be considered, the present writ petition is filed assailing the notice dated 26.3.2010 issued by the first respondent under Section 148 of the Act. This Court directed the Senior Standing Counsel to file counter affidavit. A counter affidavit is filed. The petitioner filed reply affidavit. As the matter is being disposed of in the manner indicated herein below, there is no need to sum up the contents of the counter affidavit or reply affidavit. It is brought to our notice that the second respondent has already passed assessment order on 30.6.2011 pursuant to the impugned notice under Section 148 of the Act. As the assessment order was already passed and the petitioner has an effective alternative remedy of appeal to the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) under Section 246A of the Act, we do not propose to go into various other issues raised in the writ petition. We leave open all those issues to be raised before the CIT (Appeals), Hyderabad. The writ petition, with the above observations, is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________ (V.V.S. RAO, J) _______________________________ (RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J) July 26, 2011 YS