Karan Rajesh Gulati (Legal Heir of Late Rajesh Gulati) vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 27(2) Mumbai AND ORS

PDF · subscribers
WP/1695/2026HC BombayHCBM01004636202601 September 20265 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court declined to entertain the writ petition, noting that the petitioner had already availed of the alternate remedy by filing an appeal under Section 246A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Court directed the petitioner to prosecute the already filed appeal. Recognizing the narrow compass of the issue, the Court requested the Appellate Authority to hear and decide the appeal expeditiously, preferably within 12 weeks from the date of the order being brought to their notice. The petitioner was directed to inform the jurisdictional Assessing Officer, who would then forward the order to the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NaFAC). Furthermore, the Court directed that no coercive action would be taken by the Revenue pursuant to the assessment order until the appeal was heard and decided. The writ petition was disposed of in these terms.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Karan Rajesh Gulati, filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court challenging notices issued under Section 142(1), a show cause notice for penalty under Section 271AAC(1) and Section 270A, and an assessment order under Section 143(3) read with Section 263 and Section 144B, all dated between November 2024 and March 2025. The primary contention was that these notices and orders were issued against a dead person and were therefore non est. The Revenue argued that the petitioner had already availed the alternate remedy by filing an appeal before the CIT (Appeals) and that disputed questions of fact warranted relegating the petitioner to that remedy. The petitioner acknowledged filing the appeal and requested a time-bound decision.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the writ petition is maintainable given that the petitioner has already availed of the alternate remedy of appeal before the CIT (Appeals)? (Question of law and fact) Assessee's Contention: The petitioner, while acknowledging the filing of an appeal, requested a direction for a time-bound disposal of the appeal if the writ petition was not entertained. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue argued that due to disputed questions of fact, the writ petition should not be entertained, and the petitioner ought to be relegated to the alternate remedy of appeal. The Revenue also pointed out that an appeal had already been filed.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 142(1),Section 271AAC(1),Section 270A,Section 143(3),Section 263,Section 144B,Section 156,Section 246A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

1-WP-1695-2026.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1695 OF 2026 Karan Rajesh Gulati .. Petitioner Versus Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 27(2), Mumbai and Ors. .. Respondents Adv. Devendra Jain, with Adv. Shashank Mehta, for the Petitioner. Adv. Arjun Gupta, for the Respondent/Revenue.

CORAM: B. P. COLABAWALLA & FARHAN P. DUBASH, JJ. DATE: SEPTEMBER 1, 2026 P. C. 1. The above Writ Petition is filed seeking the following reliefs: “(a) that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorari or a Writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ, Order or direction, calling for the records of the Petitioner’s case and after going into the legality and propriety thereof, to quash and set aside the notices issued under section 142(1) of Act dated 11.11.2024 (“Exhibit E1”), dated 27.11.2024 (“Exhibit E2”), dated 07.12.2024 (“Exhibit E3”), dated 14.12.2024 (“Exhibit E4”) & dated 25.12.2024 (“Exhibit E5”), show cause notice dated 06.01.2025 (“Exhibit F”), the order of Assessment dated 06.03.2025 passed under section 143(3) read with section 263 read with section 144B (“Exhibit I”), notice of demand dated 06.03.2025 (“Exhibit J1”) issued under section 156 and show cause notice dated 06.03.2025 Page 1 of 5 SEPTEMBER 1, 2026 Darshan Patil 2026:BHC-AS:36255-DB

1-WP-1695-2026.doc

issued for initiating penalty proceedings under section 271AAC(1) (“Exhibit J2”), and show cause notice dated 06.03.2025 issued for initiating penalty proceedings under section 270A (“Exhibit J3”).” (b) This Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or a Writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order or direction, directing the Respondents, its servants, subordinates, agents and successors in office to: i) Quash the notices issued under section 142(1) of the Act dated 11.11.2024 (“Exhibit E1”), dated 27.11.2024 (“Exhibit E2”), dated 07.12.2024 (“Exhibit E3”), dated 14.12.2024 (“Exhibit E4”) & dated 25.12.2024 (“Exhibit E5”), show cause notice dated 06.01.2025 (“Exhibit F”), the order of Assessment dated 06.03.2025 passed under section 143(3) read with section 263 read with section 144B (“Exhibit I”), notice of demand dated 06.03.2025 (“Exhibit J1”) issued under section 156 and show cause notice dated 06.03.2025 issued for initiating penalty proceedings under section 271AAC(1) (“Exhibit J2”), and show cause notice dated 06.03.2025 issued for initiating penalty proceedings under section 270A (“Exhibit J3”). ii) to forthwith forbear from taking any steps whatsoever, including issue further notices in furtherance of the order of Assessment dated 06.03.2025 passed under section 143(3) read with section 263 read with section 144B (“Exhibit I”), notice of demand dated 06.03.2025 (“Exhibit J1”) issued under section 156 and show cause notice dated 06.03.2025 issued for initiating penalty proceedings under section 271AAC(1) (“Exhibit J2”), and show cause notice dated 06.03.2025 issued for initiating penalty proceedings under section 270A (“Exhibit J3”) (c) That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of prohibition or a writ in the nature of prohibition or any other appropriate writ, order or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India prohibiting Respondents from taking any steps in furtherance of the order of Assessment dated 06.03.2025 passed under section 143(3) read with section 263 read with section 144B (“Exhibit I”), notice of demand dated 06.03.2025 Page 2 of 5 SEPTEMBER 1, 2026 Darshan Patil

1-WP-1695-2026.doc

(“Exhibit J1”) issued under section 156 and show cause notice dated 06.03.2025 issued for initiating penalty proceedings under section 271AAC(1) (“Exhibit J2”), and show cause notice dated 06.03.2025 issued for initiating penalty proceedings under section 270A (“Exhibit J3”).” 2. All the notices mentioned in the prayer clauses have been challenged on the basis that they are issued against a dead person and therefore ‘non est’. 3. Mr. Gupta, the learned Counsel for the Revenue, pointed out that the Petitioner has already availed of the alternate remedy by filing an Appeal before the CIT (Appeals). Since there are disputed questions of fact in the present matter, the Petitioner ought to be relegated to avail of the alternate remedy, and the Writ Petition ought not to be entertained. 4. Mr. Jain, the learned Counsel for the Petitioner, fairly did not dispute the fact that the Appeal has been filed. He submitted that if this Court is not inclined to entertain the present Writ Petition, a direction be given to the Appellate Authority to hear and decide the Appeal filed by the Petitioner in a time-bound manner. Page 3 of 5 SEPTEMBER 1, 2026 Darshan Patil

1-WP-1695-2026.doc

5.

Having heard the learned Counsel for the parties and considering that the Petitioner has already availed of the alternate remedy by filing his Appeal under Section 246A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in the peculiar facts of this case, we decline to entertain the above Writ Petition and direct the Petitioner to prosecute the Appeal already filed by him. 6. Since the issue in the present case lies in a narrow compass, we are of the view that this is a fit case wherein we can request the Appellate Authority to hear the Appeal of the Petitioner in a time-bound manner. We accordingly request the Appellate Authority to hear and decide the Appeal filed by the Petitioner as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of 12 weeks from the date of this order being brought to the notice of the Appellate Authority. The Petitioner shall inform the concerned Jurisdictional Assessing Officer of this order, who shall then forward the same to the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NaFAC). 7. In the peculiar facts of this case, we also direct that till the Appeal is heard and decided by the Appellate Authority, no coercive action pursuant to the Assessment Order dated 6th March 2025 shall be taken by the Revenue. Page 4 of 5 SEPTEMBER 1, 2026 Darshan Patil

1-WP-1695-2026.doc

8.

The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of in the aforesaid terms. However, there shall be no order as to costs. 9. This order will be digitally signed by the Private Secretary/ Personal Assistant of this Court. All concerned will act on production by fax or email of a digitally signed copy of this order. [FARHAN P. DUBASH, J.] [B. P. COLABAWALLA, J.] Page 5 of 5 SEPTEMBER 1, 2026 Darshan Patil Signed by: Darshan Patil Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 03/09/2026 18:40:01

More judgments on Section 142(1)

All 17,244 judgments and leading authorities on Section 142(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →