A.N. Verma J. - (1.) AGAINST a notice issued under Section 226(3) of the Income-tax Act, the petitioner came to this court by way of a petition which was disposed of by our order dated December 17, 1991, The objection raised before the court on that occasion was that no amount was payable by the petitioner to Surendra Chand Bansal and that no loan was ever taken by him from the latter. In support, the petitioner relied on his affidavit already filed before the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax. As the court thought that the dispute was yet to be investigated by the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, it disposed of the petition with a direction to the Deputy Commissioner to consider the petitioner's objection and affidavit filed on its behalf and decide it within a stated time. Pursuant to that direction, the petitioner's objection was considered and, by the impugned order, the Deputy Commissioner, Income tax, has dismissed the same.
(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner made an attempt to challenge that order on a number of grounds. It was urged that proper enquiry as contemplated by law was not conducted by the Deputy Commissioner. We are expressing no opinion on these contentions as we think that the petitioner has an effective alternative remedy available to it by way of revision under Section 264 of the Income-tax Act. Indeed, having regard to the nature of the issues involved in the case and the factual controversy arising for consideration, we think that the remedy by way of revision would be more appropriate. The Commissioner can consider all the points sought to be raised here. Learned counsel for the petitioner next submits that as the petitioner is also challenging the validity of the notice under Section 226(3), against which no revision lies, this court should entertain the petition. We are unable to agree. The main order under challenge is that passed by the Deputy Commissioner dismissing the objections against the notice issued under Section 226(3). If the revision succeeds, it is apparent that the notice cannot survive.
(3.) THE petition is, accordingly, dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy. A copy of this order may be given to learned counsel on payment of requisite charges by tomorrow.;