Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
W.P.(C) 5950/2015
SALONINARANG
Petitioner Througii: Mr. Bharat Beriwal, Advocate.
CIRCLE-15, Respondent
Through: Mr. Suruchi Aggarwal, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr. Abhishek Sharma, Advocate.
Through: Mr. Bharat Beriwal, Advocate.
2015:DHC:11151-DB o
SALONINARANG Petitioner
^1?
HARSHIT TRIPATHI Petitioner W.P.(Q Nos. 5950, 5951, 5952, 5953, 5954, 5955 & 5956 of2015 Page 3 of6
-i' )
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE I.S.MEHTA
10.06.2015 CM APPL Nos. 10783/2015.10785/2015.10787/2015.10789/2015, 10791/2015.10793/2015 & 10795/2015
ORDER
1. Exemptions allowedsubjectto alljust exemptions.
2. The applications stand disposed of. W.P.(C) 5950/2015 & CM APPL 10782/2015 (for stay) W.P.(C^ 5951/2015 & CM APPL 10784/2015 (for stay) W.P.(C) 5952/2015 & CM APPL 10786/2015 (for stay) W.P.(C) 5953/2015 & CM APPL 10788/2015 (for stay) W.P.(C) 5954/2015 & CM APPL 10790/2015 (for stay) W.P.(C) 5955/2015 & CM APPL 10792/2015 (for stay) W.P.(C) 5956/2015 & CM APPL 10794/2015 (for stay)
3. The prayer in these writ petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is that the Court should stay the operation of W.R(C) Nos. 5950, 5951, 5952, 5953, 5954, 5955 & 5956 of2015 Page 4 of[6] two notices dated 05^^ March, 2014 and 14^^ May, 2014 issued by the Respondent under Section 271 (1) (c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act') inrelation to Assessment year 2007-08 till 2011-2012 till the disposal of the first appeals preferred by the Petitioner against the Assessment Orders for those years, which are pending before the CommissionerofIncomeTax (Appeals)-XXVI,New Delhi.
4. At the outset, the Court put a query to learned counsel for the Petitioner, whether inrespect of anorder passed against thePetitioner pursuant to the impugned notices, the Petitioner would have a statutory remedy of appeal under the Act? Learned counsel for the Petitioner answered in affirmative but insisted that the Petitioner has a right to file awrit petition tochallenge the impugned notices.
5. The Court is notpersuaded to interfere in the matter at this stage when only notices have been issued to the Petitioner pursuant to the statutory powers of the Respondents. In other words, there is no statutory bar to penalty proceedings being initiated against the Petitioner. In the event any adverse order is passed against the Petitioner, shecanavail the remedies available to her under the Actin W.P.(C) Nos. 5950, 5951, 5952, 5953, 5954, 5955 &5956 of2015 Page5of[6] accordance with law, urging all the grounds that may be available to her, including those raised in the present petitions.
6. The petitions andthe applications are accordingly dismissed. JUNE 10,2015/gb S.MURALIDHAR (Vacation Judge) L^ak«EHTA ication Judge) W.P.(C) Nos. 5950, 5951, 5952, 5953, 5954, 5955 & 5956 of2015 Page 6 of[6]