GUPTA VIJAY K AND CO vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR.

2026

Mr. Nitin Kanwar, learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the notice dated 30.08.2024 issued by respondent No. 1-Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax CC-25, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ’AO’) under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act 1961, (hereinafter referred as ‘the Act of 1961’) is wholly without jurisdiction and bad in the eye of law.

In order to satisfy the Court about jurisdiction, learned counsel submitted that respondent No. 1 is an officer of Delhi and does not have jurisdiction in the instant case inasmuch as the petitioner had filed his return of income before the Income Tax Office Ward 36(1), Kolkata.

During the course of submission, learned counsel for the petitioner informed that petitioner’s jurisdiction came to be transferred to respondent No. 1 by way of order dated 29.03.2023, pursuant to a show cause notice dated 14.02.2023 issued under Section 127(2) of the Act of 1961. 5. Learned counsel contended that the notice dated 14.02.2023 was not served upon the petitioner and it was only uploaded on the Income Tax Business Application Portal and in light of judgment rendered by Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Munjal BCU Centre of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Ludhiana through its Authorised Signatory Sh. Bharat Goel v. Commissioner of Income Tax Exemptions, Chandigarh, CWP- 21028-2023 (O & M) decided on 04.03.2024, such service cannot be treated to be a service.

He argued that since the jurisdiction came to be vested in respondent No. 1 pursuant to the order dated 29.03.2023 which order was bad in the eye of law for being violative of natural justice, respondent No. 1 did not have 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 30/01/2026 at 13:26:07

Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and upon perusal of the material, we find that the notice under Section 148 was issued way back on 30.08.2024, against which the petitioner has not raised any grievance or plea of any nature. Insofar as the order under Section 127 of the Act of 1961 is concerned, the same too was passed on 29.03.2023 and no remedy was availed by the petitioner against such order. Even in the present writ petition, petitioner has not laid any challenge to the order dated 29.03.2023 passed under Section 127 of the Act of 1961. 8. Such being the position, the order under Section 127 of the Act of 1961 has attained finality sans any challenge. Hence, petitioner’s contention of impugning the notice dated 30.08.2024 falls flat on the ground.

That apart, said notice was issued way back on 30.08.2024 whereas the petitioner has preferred instant writ petition on 09.01.2026 with a delay of one year and four months, that too when the notice has culminated into an assessment order, against which the petitioner is having efficacious statutory remedy under the Act of 1961. 10. The petition is, therefore, dismissed without making any observations about the merit of the petitioner’s contention. A liberty is granted to file an appeal and raise all permissible grounds.

The petition alongwith pending applications stands dismissed accordingly.