The Madras High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the income tax assessment order due to alleged unauthorised bank account opening and transactions. The court stated that the fact disputed cannot interfere with the power of Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
The petitioner contends that a business account (current account) was opened in their name in a certain bank without their knowledge. They claimed that an alleged escaped income of Rs. 1,09,25,580/- was remitted into this account without their involvement. Following a complaint lodged with the Superintendent of Police, Erode District, and obtaining CSR.No.419 of 2023, the petitioner filed the present writ petition.
The petitioner, represented by learned counsel, showed their innocence, stating that they were employed as a clerk in a spinning mill, earning a meagre salary of Rs. 6,000/- per month. They attribute the transactions leading to the re-assessment proceedings to the involvement of Mr. Prakash Muthuswamy, an employee of Axis Bank. The petitioner seeks interim protection until a statutory appeal is filed.
Dr. B. Ramaswamy, senior standing counsel, appearing for the first respondent, The Income Tax Officer (Assessment), submitted that credits totaling Rs. 1,09,25,580/- and debits amounting to Rs. 51,50,000/- were recorded in the petitioner’s bank account during the relevant financial year. He contends that the impugned assessment order was issued following due procedure under the Income Tax Act, 1961, and hence, no interference is warranted.
A bench of Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy noted that the petitioner had previously filed W.P.No. 3848 of 2023, which was dismissed. The present writ petition was filed subsequent to the issuance of the assessment order. The petitioner claimed that the unauthorized bank account transactions led to the assessment order. However, these are disputed factual issues not suitable for adjudication under Article 226 of the Constitution.
As statutory appeal options are available to the petitioner against the assessment order, the court finds no grounds for interference under Article 226. Consequently the petition was dismissed, with the petitioner advised to pursue statutory remedies. No costs are awarded. The connected miscellaneous petition is closed accordingly.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
