On a writ petition challenging the assessment order passed under the Income-tax Act, 1961 contending that it was without jurisdiction,  dismissing the petition, that the assessee pursued parallel remedies at the same time. The assessee had filed statutory appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) under the Act and application for stay of demands before the Assessing Officer. The writ petition under article 226 of the Constitution of India was misconceived and amounted to taking chances with the judicial process which amounted to treating the extraordinary remedy as an alternate remedy to the appellate remedy provided in the statute. The assessee not only had an alternate and efficacious remedy but had already invoked it. The crucial facts, that an appeal and stay application were already filed as on the date of the institution of this petition, which constituted material facts, were suppressed. The averment was so couched as not to attract attention and contained no clear statement of the appeal having been filed, the date of filing or the fact that a stay was also applied for. The delay in instituting this petition was also not explained. All the material facts emerged only after this court posed queries, though the assessee had stated that it had not withheld any material information from this court. Cost of Rs. 1 lakh was imposed on the assessee. to be paid to the High Court Employees Medical Welfare Fund at Mumbai.