KAMLESH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER & ANR.

PDF · subscribers
W.P.(C)/10795/2025HC DelhiDLHC01049048202529 July 2025Author: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The Delhi High Court held that since an assessment order had been passed, the petitioner's remedy lay before the CIT Appeals. The Court clarified that the period during which the petitioner was prosecuting the writ petition before the High Court, from its filing on 12.05.2025 until the date of the order, would be excluded for the purpose of computing the limitation period before the appellate authority, in view of Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963. The petitioner was granted liberty to file an appropriate application seeking condonation of delay for the period prior to the filing of the writ petition, which the appellate authority would consider in accordance with law. The petitioner was also granted liberty to urge all grounds, both on facts and in law, before the appellate authority, and these would be considered by the appellate authority. The writ petition was closed.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Kamlesh, filed a writ petition before the Delhi High Court challenging a show cause notice under Section 148A(b) dated 19.02.2024, an order under Section 148A(d) dated 22.03.2024, a notice under Section 148 dated 22.03.2024, and an assessment order under Section 147 dated 30.03.2025 for Assessment Year 2020-21. The petitioner also sought to prohibit consequential recovery and penalty proceedings. The revenue raised a preliminary objection that since an assessment order had been passed, the petitioner's remedy lay before the CIT Appeals, which was a more efficacious remedy. The petitioner stated that approaching the CIT Appeals would be barred by time.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioner's remedy lies before the CIT Appeals, given that an assessment order has been passed under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and if so, whether the period spent prosecuting the writ petition can be excluded for computing the limitation period for filing an appeal before the appellate authority. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that approaching the CIT Appeals would be barred by time. The petitioner also sought to challenge the show cause notices, the order under Section 148A(d), the notice under Section 148, and the assessment order under Section 147, alleging they were bad in law, without jurisdiction, and violative of statutory principles and natural justice. Revenue's Contention: The revenue contended that in view of the assessment order having been passed, the petitioner's remedy was to approach the CIT Appeals, which was a more efficacious remedy where all pleas could be urged.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148A,Section 147,Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
$~4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 10795/2025 CM APPL. 44688/2025(Stay) KAMLESH .....Petitioner Through: Mr Dushyant Kumar, Mr Shivam Jain,Advocates. versus INCOME TAX OFFICER & ANR. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjeev Menon, JSC. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR

O R D E R % 29.07.2025

1.

This petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers: “1) Issue a writ of CERTIORARI or any other appropriate writ,order or direction quashing/set aside the impugned show causenotice u/s 148A(b) dated 19.02.2024 of the Act, impugnedorder u/s 148A(d) dated 22.03.2024, and the impugned noticeissued u/s 148 dated 22.03.2024, along with the impugnedAssessment Order under section 147 dated 30.03.2025 of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 in the petitioner’s case for AssessmentYear 2020-21, being patently bad in law, without jurisdiction,violative of statutory principles of interpretation, and inviolation of the provisions of the said income tax act, 1961 andthe principles of natural justice and other Consequentialproceedings; 2) Issue a writ of Prohibition or any other appropriate writ, orderor direction to prohibit the Assessing Officer and any otherincome Tax Authority regarding Impugned Assessment Orderunder section 147 dated on 30.03.2025 of the Income Tax Act,1961 to do any consequential recovery proceedings and anyother Consequential Penalty proceedings, if any; and 3) For such further and other reliefs, including costs of thisPetition, as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in thenature and circumstances of the case;” 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 07/08/2025 at 12:45:24

2.

The petitioner apart from challenging the show cause notices under Sections148A(b)dated 19.02.2024; 148A(d) dated 22.03.2024, 148 dated 22.03.2024, is also challenging the Assessment Order passed under section 147 dated 30.03.2025 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. This case pertains to Assessment Year 2020-21. 4. A preliminary objection has been raised by Mr. Sanjeev Menon, learned Junior Standing Counsel for the revenue that in view of the fact that the assessment order has been passed, the remedy for the petitioner shall lie before the CIT Appeals, which is a more efficacious remedy where the petitioner can urge all the pleas as available to her.

5.

On this the learned counsel for the petitioner would state that the petitioner can approach the CIT Appeals but such an appeal shall be barred by time.

6.

There is no dispute that the petitioner has been prosecuting this petition since its filing on 12.05.2025. 7. If that be so, surely the period during which the petitioner was prosecuting the present writ petition in this Court shall in any case be excluded for the purpose of computation of limitation before the appellate authority.

8.

It is for the petitioner to file an appropriate application seeking condonation of delay of the period prior to the filing of the present petition before this Court and if such an application is filed, the appellate authority shall consider the same in accordance with law.

9.

It is clarified the period during which the petitioner was prosecuting the present petition between 12.05.2025-till date shall be excluded for the purpose of computation of limitation, in view of Section 14 of Limitation 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 07/08/2025 at 12:45:24

Act, 1963. 10. Accordingly, we close this petition granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the appellate authority in accordance with law. We also make it clear that the petitioner shall be at liberty to urge all grounds both on facts and in law before the appellate authority. It goes without saying that the same shall be considered by the appellate authority. V. KAMESWAR RAO, J VINOD KUMAR, J JULY 29, 2025 tg 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 07/08/2025 at 12:45:24

More judgments on Section 148A

All 3,543 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →