ADITYA SHARMA & ANR. vs. INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT THROUGH JOIN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ORS.

W.P.(CRL)/4234/2025HC DelhiDLHC01104027202522 December 2025Author: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN2 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The Court did not decide the merits of the petition. Instead, it considered the objection raised by the Income Tax Department regarding the appropriate bench for hearing the matter. The Court directed that the petition be listed before Division Bench – II on December 23, 2025, subject to the orders of the Hon'ble Chief Justice. No finding was reached on the substantive prayers of the petitioners, nor was any issue expressly left undecided as the matter was adjourned for listing before a different bench.

What were the facts?

The petitioners, Aditya Sharma and another, filed a writ petition before the Delhi High Court seeking to quash an assessment order dated November 28, 2019, and all consequential proceedings against Petitioner No. 1. The petitioners stated they were not seeking relief regarding tax payment but rather the quashing of proceedings arising from a settlement of a matrimonial dispute. A connected matter concerning the quashing of an FIR registered at the instance of Petitioner No. 2 was also pending. The petitioners' counsel argued that since the parties had resolved all disputes and Respondent No. 3 (the complainant) admitted the complaint to the Income Tax Department was based on exaggerated facts due to the matrimonial dispute, continuing the proceedings would serve no purpose.

What were the issues?

1. Whether a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ or direction should be issued to quash the Assessment Order dated 28.11.2019 and all consequential proceedings qua Petitioner no. 1, considering the settlement of a matrimonial dispute and the complainant's admission of exaggerated facts. (Mixed question of law and fact, turning on principles of equity and administrative fairness). Assessee's Contention: The petitioners argued that the assessment proceedings should be quashed because the underlying complaint was motivated by a matrimonial dispute, and the complainant has since admitted to providing exaggerated facts. They emphasized that the dispute between the parties has been resolved, and continuing the tax proceedings would be unjust. Revenue's Contention: The Income Tax Department submitted that the present petition, seeking quashing of assessment proceedings, should be listed before the concerned Division Bench.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~87 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 4234/2025 & CRL.M.A. 38105/2025 ADITYA SHARMA & ANR. .....Petitioners Through: Ms. Mansi Rao and Ms. Mamta Saha, Advs. versus INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT THROUGH JOIN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Puneet Rai, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr. Ashvini Junior Standing Counsel for R-1 & 2. Mr. Nishant Kumar, Mr. Animesh Dr. Sumit Ms. Aprajita, Mrs. Palak Joshi, Mr. Shikhar Khanna, Mr. Prashant Shukla and Ms. Kirti Aggarwal, Advs. for R-3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN O R D E R %

22.12.2025 1. By the present petition, the petitioners seek following prayers : A. Issue writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ or direction to the Respondent no. 1 & 2 thereby quashing the Assessment Order dated 28.11.2019 along with all consequential proceedings qua Petitioner no. 1 (ANNEXURE A2).and/or

B. Issue any other appropriate Writ order or direction as deemed just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case in the interest of justice . 2. At the outset, the learned counsel for the Income Tax Department submits that the present petition seeking quashing of assessment proceedings, should be listed before the concerned Division Bench. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are in no manner seeking relief in regard to payment of tax, however, are seeking quashing of the proceedings pursuant to the settlement between the parties who were embroiled in a matrimonial dispute. 4. She submits that the connected matter seeking quashing of FIR No. 118/2016 which was registered at the instance of Petitioner No. 2, is also pending consideration before this Court. 5. She submits that since the parties have resolved all their disputes and Respondent No. 3 / complainant in the present case has also stated that the complaint was given to the Income Tax Department on exaggerated facts due to matrimonial dispute, no purpose would be served by continuing the proceedings. 6. Considering the objection raised by the Income Tax Department, list before Division Bench – II on 23.12.2025, subject to the orders of Hon’ble the Chief Justice. AMIT MAHAJAN, J DECEMBER 22, 2025 ‘KDK’

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →