The Supreme Court of India in the case of Genpact India Pvt Ltd v. DCIT held that a petition that is admitted by the High Court may be rejected by the Court on the ground of availability of an alternative remedy.
In the instant case, the petition challenging the determination of liability under Section 115QA of the Income Tax Act by the IT authority was filed wherein the matter was initially admitted along with the issuance of an interim remedy. However, the High Court declined to entertain the writ petition at its final stage on the ground of availability of alternative remedy.
The issues in the present matter were that whether an appellate remedy was available in the present case and whether the jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 could be denied on the ground of availability of alternative remedy.
It was contended by the appellant that the order passed by DCIT was without jurisdiction as buyback of shares in the instant case was in pursuance of the scheme of arrangement before the High Court and any buyback of shares in pursuance thereof would not be covered by the provisions of Section 115QA of the Act.
The appellant submitted that no right to appeal was available under the provisions of the Act as the premise on which the High Court proceeded was wrong. In any case plea of the existence of any alternate and efficacious remedy would be considered at the threshold when a writ petition is taken up for preliminary hearing.
The Bench constituting of Justices U.U Lalit and Indira Banerjee held that (1) Appeal would be maintainable against the determination of liability under Section 115QA of the Income Tax Act. (2) Further, the Supreme Court held that the High Court’s approach while refusing to entertain the Writ Petition is correct.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the Judgment
