KAILASH CHAND PRATIHAR S/O SHIVRAJ SINGH vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

CW/2217/2026HC Rajasthan2026:RJ-JP:6187-DB10 February 2026Bench: SANJAY K. AGRAWAL, SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA1 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The Tribunal held that a writ petition is not maintainable when an alternative statutory remedy of appeal is available. The judgment explicitly states that against the order impugned, a remedy of appeal lies under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, before the CIT (Appeals), which had not been availed by the petitioner. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the writ petition. The court granted the petitioner liberty to file an appeal before the CIT (Appeals). No specific findings were made on the merits of the assessment order itself, as the petition was dismissed on procedural grounds. The ratio decidendi is that statutory remedies must be exhausted before approaching the writ court, unless exceptional circumstances are present.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Kailash Chand Pratihar, filed a writ petition before the Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench, challenging an order passed under Section 143 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The respondents were the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax and other income tax authorities. The assessment year(s) are not specified in the judgment. The procedural history indicates that the petitioner approached the High Court directly via a writ petition instead of availing the statutory remedy of appeal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the writ petition is maintainable when an alternative statutory remedy of appeal under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is available to the petitioner? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner has not presented any arguments in the judgment regarding the maintainability of the writ petition or any grounds for bypassing the appellate remedy. Revenue's Contention: The revenue contended that an appeal lies before the CIT (Appeals) against the order impugned, and therefore, the writ petition is not maintainable.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

[2026:RJ-JP:6187-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2217/2026 Kailash Chand Pratihar S/o Shivraj Singh, Aged About 56 Years, R/o Paroli Bhilwara, Rajasthan ----Petitioner Versus 1. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Pcit(Au)-1, Jaipur New Central Revenue Building, Bhagwan Dass Road, Statue Circle, Jaipur. 2. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Dc/acit(Au)-1(4) (1), Jaipur At Bhilwara, C.r. Buiilding, Kawa Khera Chouraha, Shastri Nagar, Bhilwara 3. Income Tax Officer, Assessment Unit, Ito(Au)-1(4), Jaipur At Bhilwara, C.r. Buiilding, Kawa Khera Chouraha, Shastri Nagar, Bhilwara ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Parth Gupta For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shantanu Sharma with Mr. Parth Vashishtha & Mr. Aditya Doda HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SANGEETA SHARMA Order 10/02/2026 1. Heard. 2. This writ petition has been filed challenging the order under Section 143 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act of 1961’). 3. Against the order impugned, a remedy of appeal lies under Section 250 of the Act of 1961 before the CIT (Appeals), which has not been availed. 4. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed with liberty to file appeal before CIT (Appeals). (SANGEETA SHARMA),J (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),ACTING CJ SANJAY KUMAWAT/RAJAT/25 Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) (Uploaded on 12/02/2026 at 04:14:20 PM) (Downloaded on 30/10/2026 at 10:21:29 AM)

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →