Reassessment order passed in case of assessee for assessment year 2009-10 was sought to be challenged before Single Judge on ground of alleged breach of principles of natural justice by assessing authority, namely, non­-service of statutory notice under section 148 on assessee and non­-grant of adequate opportunity to raise objections to assessee . Single Judge noticed that proceedings had been initiated from month of March 2016 followed by various notices which would indicate that there was no violation of principles of natural justice and that assessee had deliberately avoided to approach concerned authorities and further that assessee had an alternative and efficacious remedy of filing an appeal, and thus, he was of view that exercise of a writ jurisdiction under article 226 was uncalled for.   Affirming the decision of single judge the Court held  existence of an alternative and efficacious remedy, it would be improper for a writ court to exercise its jurisdiction and, thus, question as to whether notice issued under section 147 is justified or not is a question of fact and as questions of fact cannot be gone into by a writ court, it would necessarily have to be considered by concerned authorities . (AY. 2009-10)

Reassessment order passed in case of assessee for assessment year 2009-10 was sought to be challenged before Single Judge on ground of alleged breach of principles of natural justice by assessing authority, namely, non­-service of statutory notice under section 148 on assessee and non­-grant of adequate opportunity to raise objections to assessee . Single Judge noticed that proceedings had been initiated from month of March 2016 followed by various notices which would indicate that there was no violation of principles of natural justice and that assessee had deliberately avoided to approach concerned authorities and further that assessee had an alternative and efficacious remedy of filing an appeal, and thus, he was of view that exercise of a writ jurisdiction under article 226 was uncalled for.   Affirming the decision of single judge the Court held  existence of an alternative and efficacious remedy, it would be improper for a writ court to exercise its jurisdiction and, thus, question as to whether notice issued under section 147 is justified or not is a question of fact and as questions of fact cannot be gone into by a writ court, it would necessarily have to be considered by concerned authorities . (AY. 2009-10)