KARTAR SINGH vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR.

PDF · subscribers
W.P.(C)/2100/2026HC DelhiDLHC01109800202513 February 2026Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the writ petition. Regarding the petitioner's contention that the alleged escaped income was less than five lacs, the Court found that the notice dated March 17, 2025, indicated the alleged escaped income to be Rs. 1,13,02,594/-, which is not less than fifty lakhs. Therefore, this ground for challenging the proceedings was found to be without substance. Concerning the petitioner's claim that the proceedings were time-barred and that the AO failed to consider the facts and explanations appropriately, the Court held that whether the facts were correctly examined is a question of appreciation of evidence and material. Such a determination falls outside the High Court's jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Kartar Singh, filed a writ petition challenging a notice dated March 17, 2025, issued under Section 148A(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2019-20. The petitioner argued that the alleged escaped income was less than five lacs and that the proceedings were initiated beyond the period of three years and three months, rendering them without jurisdiction. The petitioner also contended that their detailed explanation to the Assessing Officer (AO) was not appropriately considered and that the AO did not examine the facts in their true perspective. The respondents were the Commissioner of Income Tax and another authority. The High Court noted that the alleged escaped income was Rs. 1,13,02,594/-, which is not less than fifty lakhs.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice dated 17.03.2025 issued under Section 148A(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2019-20 is without jurisdiction on the grounds that the alleged escaped income is less than five lacs and the proceedings were initiated beyond the period of three years and three months? (Question of law and fact, turning on Section 148A and limitation periods). Assessee's Contentions: - The alleged escaped income is less than five lacs. - The proceedings were initiated beyond the period of three years and three months, making them time-barred and without jurisdiction. - The Assessing Officer (AO) did not appropriately consider the detailed explanation furnished by the petitioner. - The AO did not consider the facts in their true prospective. Revenue's Contentions: - Not recorded in the judgment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148A(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~15 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 2100/2026 KARTAR SINGH .....Petitioner Through: Appearance not given versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR......Respondents Through: Mr. Siddhartha Sinha, SSC CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR O R D E R %

13.02.2026 1. By the present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the notice dated 17.03.2025 issued under Section 148A (1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. We do not find any substance in the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner that the alleged escaped income is less than five lacs and the proceedings initiated by the respondents is without jurisdiction inasmuch as the initiation was beyond the period of three years and three months. 3. The reason for which the petitioner claims that the proceedings are time barred and the income escaped is less than 50 lacs, is that he has furnished a detailed explanation before the Assessing Officer, which has not been considered appropriately, so also the AO did not consider the facts in their true prospective. 4. On perusal of the notice impugned dated 17.03.2025 in the present 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 16/02/2026 at 13:32:23

writ petition and the reasons in support thereof, we find that the alleged escaped income is Rs. 1,13,02,594/-. It therefore, cannot be said that the escaped income is less than 50 lakhs. 5. Whether the facts have been correctly examined or not is a question of appreciation of evidence and material, which this Court cannot go into its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 6. The writ petition is therefore, dismissed. DINESH MEHTA, J. VINOD KUMAR, J. FEBRUARY 13, 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 16/02/2026 at 13:32:23

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →