AMBIANCE DEVELOPERS AND INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR.
What did the High Court hold?
The Delhi High Court held that it would not entertain the writ petition filed by the petitioner. The Court reasoned that the petitioner possessed a statutory remedy of appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) against the order passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Court found it inapposite to intervene when such an alternative remedy was available. Therefore, the writ petition was dismissed. The Court also noted that if the petitioner were to file an appeal before the ITAT along with an application for condonation of delay, such application would be considered in accordance with the law. No other issues were decided on merits.
What were the facts?
The petitioner, Ambiance Developers and Infrastructure Private Limited, filed a writ petition before the Delhi High Court challenging an order dated 29.02.2024 passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The revenue was represented by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and another respondent. The High Court noted that the petitioner had a statutory remedy of appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) against the PCIT's order. Consequently, the High Court deemed it inappropriate to entertain the writ petition.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the Delhi High Court should entertain a writ petition challenging an order passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, when a statutory remedy of appeal to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is available. The Assessee (Petitioner) argued that the writ petition was maintainable. The Revenue (Respondent) did not record any specific arguments in the judgment regarding the maintainability of the writ petition, but their presence indicates opposition to the petition. This issue turns on the principles of alternative remedies and the High Court's writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
O R D E R % 26.03.2025 CM APPL. 17702/2025
Exemption is allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
The application stands disposed of. W.P.(C) 3797/2025, CM APPL. 17701/2025 & CM APPL. 17703/2025
The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, impugning an order dated 29.02.2024 passed by the learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax [PCIT] under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [the Act].
Concededly, the petitioner has a statutory remedy of an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal against the said decision, and therefore, this court does not consider it apposite to entertain the present petition. The same is accordingly, dismissed.
Needless to state that if the petitioner files an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal along with an application seeking 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 01/07/2025 at 21:32:34
condonation of delay in filing the appeal, the same would be considered in accordance with law.
Pending applications shall also stand disposed of. VIBHU BAKHRU, J TEJAS KARIA, J MARCH 26, 2025 K Click here to check corrigendum, if any 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 01/07/2025 at 21:32:34
More judgments on Section 263
- Gillette India Limited, Mumbai vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, JaipurITA 1316/JPR/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Neo Structo Construction P. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The Pr. CIT- 3, AhmedabadITA 1216/AHD/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Vimal Harilal Baldania, Gandhidham vs The ITO Ward 2, GandhidhamITA 770/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1493/KOL/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1492/KOL/2026[2013-2014]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2013-2014
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Noore Manpower Services vs. Commissioner Central Goods And Services TaxUttarakhand · 2 Nov 2026
- Maa Bhawani Minrals vs. Commissioner Central Goods And Services TaxUttarakhand · 2 Nov 2026
- M/S. Nourangi Paints vs. The Union Of INDIAPatna · 2 Nov 2026
- Basant Kumar Gupta vs. Union Of INDIAPatna · 2 Nov 2026
- M/S Swapnashiyana Homes Developers Private Limited vs. The Union Of INDIAPatna · 2 Nov 2026