SHRI ADARSH JHUNJHUNWALA vs. UNION OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FINANCE DEPPTT. OF REVENUE AND 3 OTHERS
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court declined to pass any order in the writ petition that could prejudice either party in the pending statutory appeal before the ITAT. The Court found that the statutory appeal required expeditious hearing and disposal. Therefore, the writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Circuit Bench at Varanasi, to hear and dispose of the pending statutory appeal filed by the writ petitioner as expeditiously as possible, preferably within two months but not later than three months from the date of communication of the order. The Tribunal was also directed to consider the contentions the writ petitioner sought to raise. The Court further stipulated that neither the petitioner nor the Revenue should seek unnecessary adjournments, and the Tribunal should not grant them unless exigency demanded.
What were the facts?
The writ petition was filed by Shri Adarsh Jhunjhunwala challenging an order dated 22nd March, 2019, passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Varanasi, under section 263 of the Income Tax Act. This order cancelled an earlier assessment order dated 30th December, 2016, pursuant to a show cause notice dated 25th February, 2019. The petitioner is an Ex-Director of a company undergoing insolvency proceedings. The petitioner had sought an amendment to the writ petition's prayer to suspend the operation of the assessment order and demand, as his statutory appeal was pending before the ITAT, Varanasi. The High Court allowed the amendment and directed the ITAT to expeditiously hear and dispose of the pending statutory appeal.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the High Court should pass an order in the writ petition that could prejudice the pending statutory appeal before the ITAT. (Mixed question of law and fact, concerning the scope of writ jurisdiction vis-à-vis statutory appeals). Assessee's contention: The petitioner argued that the statutory appeal was rendered illusory and otiose due to the pending assessment and demand, and sought suspension of the order. The petitioner also sought to raise contentions before the ITAT as sought to be raised before the High Court. Revenue's contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the Revenue in response to the writ petition or the amendment application, other than the appearance of counsel for the respondent.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Court No. - 7 Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 1393 of 2019 Petitioner :- Shri Adarsh Jhunjhunwala Respondent :- Union Of India, Ministry Of Finance Depptt. Of Revenue And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Abhinav Mehrotra Counsel for Respondent :- S.S.C. Hon'ble Biswanath Somadder,J. Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J. This writ petition has been taken out by one Shri Adarsh Jhunjhunwala, who claims to be a businessman and an Ex-Director of a Private Limited Company, which is presently undergoing insolvency proceeding. The subject matter of challenge has its genesis in an order of assessment dated 30th December, 2016, read with a show cause notice dated 25th February, 2019, issued under section 263 of the Income Tax Act, whereby the Revenue proposed to revise the assessment order dated 30th December, 2016. It further appears that pursuant to the issuance of the said show cause notice dated 25th February, 2019, an order dated 22nd March, 2019, was issued by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Varanasi, whereby the original assessment order dated 30th December, 2016, stood cancelled. The order passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Varanasi, dated 22nd March, 2019, under section 263 of the Income Tax Act, is now a matter of challenge before the statutory appellate tribunal at Varanasi.
-2- In an order passed by us earlier today, we have allowed the petitioner’s civil miscellaneous application by permitting the writ petitioner to cause the following amendment in the prayer portion of the writ petition:- “To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS calling for the Record of proceedings of Assessment and thereafter to suspend the operation and implementation of Order of Assessment – Undated [claimed by Revenue to be made on 20.12.2016], issued by Respondent no. 4 including demand raised in consequence to such assessment, since the Income Tax Appeal of the Petitioner is awaiting adjudication before the Ld. ITAT. The Statutory Right of Appeal bestowed upon the Petitioner has been rendered rather illusionary and otiose in the present circumstance” There are several issues which have been raised before us all of which are stated in the grounds of the writ petition. In order to avoid prolixity, we refrain from reproducing the same since we do not wish to pass any order in the instant writ petition which could cause prejudice to either of the parties in respect of the pending statutory appeal at Varanasi. We are, however, of the view that the statutory appeal is required to be heard out and dispose of as expeditiously as possible, considering the facts and circumstance of the instant case. We, therefore, dispose of the writ petition with a direction upon the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Circuit Bench at Varanasi, to hear out and dispose of the pending statutory
-3- appeal filed by the writ petitioner herein as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two months but not later than three months from date of communication of a photostat certified copy of this order. While disposing of the statutory appeal, the learned Tribunal shall take into consideration the contention of the writ petitioner, as sought to be raised before us. We wish to make it clear that it will not be open either to the writ petitioner or to the Revenue to seek unnecessary adjournments before the learned Tribunal and the learned Tribunal shall not grant any such adjournment, unless of course, exigency so demands. Order Date :- 03.01.2020 Deepak/Dhananjai (Biswanath Somadder, J.) (Ajay Bhanot, J.)
Court No. - 7 In Re: Civil Misc. Application No. Nill of 2020 Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 1393 of 2019 Petitioner :- Shri Adarsh Jhunjhunwala Respondent :- Union Of India, Ministry Of Finance Depptt. Of Revenue And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Abhinav Mehrotra Counsel for Respondent :- S.S.C. Hon'ble Biswanath Somadder,J. Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J. Considering the averments made in the instant miscellaneous application and upon hearing the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the parties, we allow the application by an order in terms of prayer “ i ”. Let the supplementary affidavit annexed to the application be also taken on record. Order Date :- 03.01.2020 Deepak/Dhananjai (Biswanath Somadder, J.) (Ajay Bhanot, J.)
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 →- Sri Alok Kumar Singh vs. The State Of Assam And 3 OrsGauhati · 5 Nov 2026
- Sri Mintu Das vs. The Union Of INDIA And 3 OrsGauhati · 5 Nov 2026
- Alhanney Guest House vs. The State Of Assam And 3 OrsGauhati · 5 Nov 2026
- Abdul Majid vs. The Union Of INDIA And 3 OrsGauhati · 5 Nov 2026
- Dipankar Borgohain vs. The Union Of INDIA And 7 OrsGauhati · 5 Nov 2026