DASHMESH CONTRACTORS vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 45(1) DELHI & ORS.

PDF · subscribers
W.P.(C)/6099/2026HC DelhiDLHC01019625202622 May 2026Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court, upon observing that it would not be proper to exercise its jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, granted the petitioner's request to withdraw the writ petition. The Court dismissed the writ petition as withdrawn with liberty to file an appeal. Furthermore, the Court directed that if the petitioner files an appeal on or before July 31, 2026, the Appellate Authority shall consider it on its merits without raising any objection regarding limitation. This was based on the reasoning that the petitioner had been bona fide pursuing its rights against the assessment order dated March 23, 2026, before the High Court. The writ petition and all pending applications were disposed of accordingly. No specific issue regarding the assessment order itself was decided on merits.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Dashmesh Contractors, filed a writ petition before the Delhi High Court challenging an assessment order dated March 23, 2026, passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 43(1). The respondents were the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and another authority. After arguing the matter for some time, the petitioner's counsel sought permission to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to file an appeal. The Court granted this liberty and dismissed the writ petition as withdrawn. The Court also directed the Appellate Authority to consider any appeal filed by the petitioner on or before July 31, 2026, on merits without raising any objection regarding limitation, acknowledging the petitioner's bona fide pursuit of its rights before the High Court.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should exercise its jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India in the present matter. The petitioner, Dashmesh Contractors, initially approached the High Court by way of a writ petition. After some arguments, the petitioner's counsel, Ms. Kavita Jha, sought permission to withdraw the petition, indicating that the Court had observed certain facts that made it improper for the High Court to exercise its extraordinary writ jurisdiction. The petitioner's intention was to pursue the matter through an appeal. The revenue, represented by Mr. Sunil Agarwal, did not record any specific arguments against the withdrawal or the liberty sought, as the petitioner themselves moved for withdrawal based on the Court's observations.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~34 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 6099/2026 CM APPL. 30000/2026 CM APPL. 30001/2026

DASHMESH CONTRACTORS

.....Petitioner Through: Ms. Kavita Jha, Sr. Adv. with Ms. Aditi Sabharwal, Mr. Abhishek Anand & Mr. Himanshu Aggarwal, Advs.

versus

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 43 (1) & ANR.

.....Respondents Through: Mr. Sunil Agarwal, SSC with Ms. Monica Benjamin, JSC, Mr. Gibran Naushad, JSC, Mr. Rohit Chakraborty & Mr. Vivan Garg, Adv.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR

O R D E R %

22.05.2026 1. Pursuant to the Court’s observation that there are certain facts qua which it would not be proper for this Court to exercise its jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, after arguing for some time, Ms. Kavita Jha, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the present writ petition with liberty to file an appeal,. 2. With liberty as prayed, writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. 3. In case the petitioner files an appeal on or before 31.07.2026, the Appellate Authority shall consider the same on merits without raising 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 26/05/2026 at 13:05:57

objection regarding limitation, as the petitioner was bonafidely pursuing its right against the assessment order dated 23.03.2026 before this Court. 4. The writ petition stands disposed of alongwith all pending applications.

DINESH MEHTA, J

VINOD KUMAR, J MAY 22, 2026/sr 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 26/05/2026 at 13:05:57

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →