Case LawHigh Court › Wtax/367/2023 Of Mubashir Mustafa Khan v...

Wtax/367/2023 Of Mubashir Mustafa Khan v. Principal Chief Commissioner Income Tax, And Another

High Court 19 Apr 2023 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · cisdb_16012018
Parties
Wtax/367/2023 Of Mubashir Mustafa Khan v. Principal Chief Commissioner Income Tax, And Another
Date of order
19 Apr 2023
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

Case summary

In Wtax/367/2023 Of Mubashir Mustafa Khan v. Principal Chief Commissioner Income Tax, And Another, the High Court (2023) decided the matter.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

Sections referenced in this judgment

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 367 of 2023 Petitioner :- Mubashir Mustafa Khan Respondent :- Principal Chief Commissioner Income Tax, And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Parv Agarwal Counsel for Respondent :- Gaurav Mahajan,Krishna Agarawal Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J. This petition has been filed challenging the notice issued to thepetitioner under section 148-A (d) of the Income Tax Act as also anotice issued under section 142 (1) of the Act of 1961. Thesenotices are challenged on the ground that assessee Late IqbalMustafa Khan is not the predecessor in interest of the petitionerand that the petitioner is neither his son nor the legal representativeand, therefore, service of notice upon the petitioner is withoutjurisdiction. Sri Krishna Agarwal, appearing for the department, submits thatorder of assessment has now been passed on 26.03.2023, againstwhich the person aggrieved has the remedy of filing appeal. It iscontended that in such circumstances, the writ petition is not liableto be entertained. Sri Krishna Agarwal further points out thatpetitioner's contention that he is not the legal representative and,therefore, the proceedings could not be continued against thedeceased assessee through the petitioner, has not been accepted bythe department, for which valid reasons have been accorded in theorder itself. It is further submitted that such issues of fact can stillbe gone into by the appellate court. We find substance in the objection taken on behalf of respondentsand since the petitioner has an efficacious alternative remedy of preferring appeal, therefore, we decline to interfere in the presentwrit petition and the same is consigned to records. All rights and contentions of the petitioner are left open foradjudication in the appropriate proceedings. Order Date :- 19.4.2023Shafique
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ Defend a reassessment (Sec 148) notice → 💬 Ask our CA
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation. Full disclaimer & Terms.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan