VINOSHA REALITY PRIVATE LIMITED vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 26(3) DELHI & ORS.

PDF · subscribers
W.P.(C)/3682/2025HC DelhiDLHC01015482202501 May 2025Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The Delhi High Court declined to entertain the writ petition. The Court noted that the petitioner had already availed of its statutory remedy by filing an appeal against the assessment order dated March 19, 2024. In view of the petitioner having recourse to its statutory remedies, the Court deemed it inappropriate to entertain the writ petition. The Court clarified that its order would not preclude the petitioner from raising all grounds, including those articulated in the present petition, before the appellate authority. The petition and any pending applications were disposed of.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Vinosha Reality Private Limited, filed a writ petition before the Delhi High Court challenging a notice dated March 21, 2023, issued under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and an assessment order dated March 19, 2024, passed under Section 147 read with Section 144B of the Act. The petitioner contended that the information forming the basis of the Section 148A(b) notice was factually erroneous. The assessment proceedings had concluded with the impugned assessment order. The petitioner had already availed of its statutory remedy by filing an appeal against the assessment order.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Delhi High Court should entertain a writ petition challenging a notice under Section 148A(b) and an assessment order under Section 147 read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, when the petitioner has already availed of its statutory remedy of filing an appeal against the assessment order? (Question of law and mixed fact and law, turning on the principles of alternative remedies and writ jurisdiction). Assessee's contention: The petitioner sought to quash the notice and assessment order, arguing that the basis for reassessment proceedings was erroneous facts. The petition implicitly argues for the High Court's intervention due to the alleged fundamental flaw in the initiation of reassessment. Revenue's contention: The respondents, represented by the Senior Standing Counsel, did not record any specific arguments in the judgment. However, their presence and the nature of the proceedings suggest they would likely oppose the writ petition on the grounds of alternative remedy.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148A,Section 147,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 3682/2025 & CM APPL. 17255/2025

VINOSHA REALITY PRIVATE LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Garima Chauhan, Mr. Divyanshu Sarswat and Mr. Himanshgu Sarswat, Advocates

versus

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 26(3) DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Siddhartha Sinha, Senior Standing Counsel

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA

O R D E R %

01.05.2025 1. Petitioner has filed the present petition inter alia praying as under: “(i) Admit and allow the present Writ Petition in hand on merits as this Hon'ble Court has absolute and appropriate jurisdiction to hear and decide the same; (ii) Issue a writ/order/direction of CERTIORARI or any other appropriate writ/ direction/order quashing the impugned Notice dated 21.03.2023 passed u/s 148A(b) and impugned Assessment order dated 19.03.2024 as passed by NFAC under section 147 r/w section 144B of Income tax act 1961.”

2.

Petitioner seeks to challenge the impugned assessment order on the ground that the information as set out in the notice under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [the Act] pursuant to which the Assessing Officer 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 19:10:56

[AO] had issued pre-initiation procedure for initiation of the reassessment proceedings is based on erroneous facts. 3. It is noted that the reassessment proceedings have culminated in the assessment order dated 19.03.2024, which is also impugned in the present petition. It is noted that the petitioner has availed of its statutory remedy in filing of the appeal against the said order. 4. In view of the fact that the petitioner has taken recourse to its statutory remedies, we do not consider it apposite to entertain the present petition. The same is accordingly disposed of. Pending application also stands disposed of. 5. We, however, clarify that nothing stated in this order be read as precluding the petitioner from raising such grounds as may be advised including those as articulated in the present petition.

VIBHU BAKHRU, J

TEJAS KARIA, J MAY 1, 2025 ns

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 19:10:56

More judgments on Section 148A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →