Dismissing the petition the Court held that merely because the order of the Dispute Resolution Panel may be binding on the Assessing Officer, against whose order, the appeal can be filed only before the Tribunal, a shortcut cannot be provided to the assessee to invoke the writ jurisdiction, which itself has three tiers of remedies; before the High Court, two tiers, viz., the single judge dealing with the writ petition and the intra-court writ appeal before the Division Bench and then if the matter is taken up to the Supreme Court by way of a special leave petition under article 136 of the Constitution of India. If the matter is dragged through these three tiers, it would be impossible for the orders of the Dispute Resolution Panel to be executed by the Assessing Officer and the Tribunal to apply its mind to the factual aspects of the matter for a long period. Prematurely pronouncing on these issues, definitely curtails the discretion of the assessing authorities in this regard and it is a self defeating exercise, which the High Court in its writ jurisdiction would be reluctant to undertake. (AY.2012-13)
Hyundai Motor India Ltd. v. Secretary, Income-Tax Department (2020) 428 ITR 545/195 DTR 260/ 317 CTR 603 /(2021) 276 Taxman 453 (Mad.)(HC)
S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Direction by Dispute Resolution Panel-Writ Petition is not maintainable against such direction. [Art. 226]