> v. Income Tax Officer & Anr

$~4 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+W.P.(C) 10795/2025 CM APPL. 44688/2025(Stay)KAMLESH .....Petitioner Through:Mr Dushyant Kumar, Mr ShivamJain,Advocates. versus INCOME TAX OFFICER & ANR. .....Respondent Through:Mr. Sanjeev Menon, JSC. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAOHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMARO R D E R29.07.2025 % 1.This petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers: “1) Issue a writ of CERTIORARI or any other appropriatewrit,order or direction quashing/set aside the impugnedshow causenotice u/s 148A(b) dated 19.02.2024 of the Act,impugnedorder u/s 148A(d) dated 22.03.2024, and theimpugned noticeissued u/s 148 dated 22.03.2024, along withthe impugnedAssessment Order under section 147 dated30.03.2025 of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 in the petitioner’scase for AssessmentYear 2020-21, being patently bad inlaw, without jurisdiction,violative of statutory principles ofinterpretation, and inviolation of the provisions of the saidincome tax act, 1961 andthe principles of natural justiceand other Consequentialproceedings; 2) Issue a writ of Prohibition or any other appropriate writ,orderor direction to prohibit the Assessing Officer and anyotherincome Tax Authority regarding Impugned AssessmentOrderunder section 147 dated on 30.03.2025 of the IncomeTax Act,1961 to do any consequential recovery proceedingsand anyother Consequential Penalty proceedings, if any;and 3) For such further and other reliefs, including costs ofthisPetition, as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and properin thenature and circumstances of the case;” 2.The petitioner apart from challenging the show cause notices underSections148A(b)dated 19.02.2024; 148A(d) dated 22.03.2024, 148 dated22.03.2024, is also challenging the Assessment Order passed under section147 dated 30.03.2025 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3.This case pertains to Assessment Year 2020-21. 4.A preliminary objection has been raised by Mr. Sanjeev Menon,learned Junior Standing Counsel for the revenue that in view of the fact thatthe assessment order has been passed, the remedy for the petitioner shall liebefore the CIT Appeals, which is a more efficacious remedy where thepetitioner can urge all the pleas as available to her. 5.On this the learned counsel for the petitioner would state that thepetitioner can approach the CIT Appeals but such an appeal shall be barredby time. 6.There is no dispute that the petitioner has been prosecuting thispetition since its filing on 12.05.2025. 7.If that be so, surely the period during which the petitioner wasprosecuting the present writ petition in this Court shall in any case beexcluded for the purpose of computation of limitation before the appellateauthority. 8.It is for the petitioner to file an appropriate application seekingcondonation of delay of the period prior to the filing of the present petitionbefore this Court and if such an application is filed, the appellate authorityshall consider the same in accordance with law. 9.It is clarified the period during which the petitioner was prosecutingthe present petition between 12.05.2025-till date shall be excluded for thepurpose of computation of limitation, in view of Section 14 of Limitation Act, 1963. 10.Accordingly, we close this petition granting liberty to the petitioner toapproach the appellate authority in accordance with law. We also make itclear that the petitioner shall be at liberty to urge all grounds both on factsand in law before the appellate authority. It goes without saying that thesame shall be considered by the appellate authority. V. KAMESWAR RAO, J JULY 29, 2025tg VINOD KUMAR, J