SMT. MADHU GUPTA & ORS. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) & ANR.

PDF · subscribers
W.P.(C)/2202/2026HC DelhiDLHC01005733202616 February 2026Author: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that it would not interfere directly under its writ jurisdiction against the order of the appellate authority, as a remedy of appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is available to the petitioners. The Court reasoned that the statutory appellate mechanism is the appropriate forum to address grievances arising from such orders. Therefore, the writ petition was dismissed. However, the Court granted a concession to the petitioners, directing that if they file an appeal before the Tribunal within four weeks from the date of the order, the Tribunal should appropriately consider the time spent between the filing of the writ petition (10.01.2026) and the filing of the appeal. No specific finding was given on the substantive issue of the assessment order being passed against a deceased assessee.

What were the facts?

The petitioners, Smt. Madhu Gupta & Ors., filed a writ petition before the Delhi High Court challenging an order dated 23.09.2025 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-18 under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The core of their grievance was that the assessment order for Assessment Year 2011-12 was passed against the assessee, who was the husband of petitioner No.1, and who had passed away on 19.01.2016. The petitioners contended that a notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued on 31.03.2018, after the assessee's demise. The writ petition was filed on 10.01.2026.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should entertain a writ petition directly against an order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) when an alternative remedy of appeal to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is available. (Question of law) The petitioners argued that the assessment order was passed against a deceased person, rendering it void ab initio. They sought direct intervention from the High Court. The revenue, represented by the Standing Counsel, did not explicitly record arguments on the merits of the deceased assessee issue but implicitly relied on the availability of the appellate remedy. The High Court's primary consideration was the existence of an alternative statutory remedy.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
$~79 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 2202/2026 SMT. MADHU GUPTA & ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Atul Agarwal and Mr. Rakesh Kumar Khare, Advs. versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Siddhartha Sinha, SSC, Ms. Easha Gurung, JSC and Ms. Nring Chamuibo Zeliang and Ms. Anu Priya Nisha Minz, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR

O R D E R %

16.02.

2026

1.

The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 23.09.2025 passed under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act of 1961’) by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-18 in petitioner’s appeal.

2.

The sole ground for which the petitioner has approached this Court is that the assessment order has been passed against the assessee, being husband of the petitioner No.1, who had since passed away (19.01.2016). As per the petitioner, even when the notice dated 31.03.2018 was issued under This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 19/02/2026 at 13:03:11

Section 148 of the Act of 1961 for Assessment Year 2011-12, the assessee was not surviving.

3.

We do not find any reason to interfere directly under our writ jurisdiction, against the order of the appellate authority, because a remedy of appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Tribunal’) is very much available to the petitioners.

4.

The petition is dismissed.

5.

In case the petitioners file an appeal within a period of four weeks from today, the Tribunal shall appropriately consider the time spent between the date of filing the present writ petition (i.e. 10.01.2026) and the date on which the appeal is preferred.

6.

With these observations, petition stands disposed of. DINESH MEHTA, J VINOD KUMAR, J FEBRUARY 16, 2026/cd This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 19/02/2026 at 13:03:11

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →