Case LawHigh Court › Wtax/504/2022 Of Ritu Kapur v. The Assis...

Wtax/504/2022 Of Ritu Kapur v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax And 3 Others

High Court 05 Apr 2022 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · cisdb_16012018
Parties
Wtax/504/2022 Of Ritu Kapur v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax And 3 Others
Date of order
05 Apr 2022
Assessment year(s)
2015-16, 2016-17, 2014-15, 2013-14
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In Wtax/504/2022 Of Ritu Kapur v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax And 3 Others, the High Court (2022) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.

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

The order — as passed by the High Court

1. Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 504 of 2022Petitioner :- Ritu KapurRespondent :- The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax And 3 OthersCounsel for Petitioner :- Rahul AgarwalCounsel for Respondent :- Gaurav Mahajan With 2. Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 506 of 2022Petitioner :- Raghav BahiRespondent :- The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax And 3 OthersCounsel for Petitioner :- Rahul AgarwalCounsel for Respondent :- Gaurav Mahajan 3. Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 501 of 2022Petitioner :- Ritu KapurRespondent :- The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax And 3 OthersCounsel for Petitioner :- Rahul AgarwalCounsel for Respondent :- Gaurav Mahajan 4. Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 502 of 2022Petitioner :- Raghav BahiRespondent :- The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax And 3 OthersCounsel for Petitioner :- Rahul AgarwalCounsel for Respondent :- Gaurav Mahajan 5. Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 503 of 2022Petitioner :- Ritu KapurRespondent :- The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax And 3 OthersCounsel for Petitioner :- Rahul AgarwalCounsel for Respondent :- Gaurav Mahajan 6. Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 507 of 2022Petitioner :- Raghav BahiRespondent :- The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax And 3 OthersCounsel for Petitioner :- Rahul AgarwalCounsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. 7. Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 508 of 2022Petitioner :- Raghav BahiRespondent :- The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax And 3 OthersCounsel for Petitioner :- Rahul AgarwalCounsel for Respondent :- Gaurav Mahajan Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J.Hon'ble Jayant Banerji,J. Heard Sri Gagan Kumar alongwith Sri Rahul Agarwal, learned counsel for thepetitioners and Sri Gaurav Mahajan, learned Senior standing counsel for therespondents - Income Tax Department. Learned counsels for the parties jointly state that Writ Tax No.504 of 2022 relates toA.Y. 2015-16, Writ Tax No.506 of 2022 relates to A.Y. 2015-16, Writ Tax No.507 of 2022 relates to A.Y. 2016-17, Writ Tax No.508 of 2022 relates to A.Y.2014-15, Writ Tax No.501 of 2022 relates to A.Y. 2016-17, Writ Tax No.502 of2022 and Writ Tax No.503 of 2022 both relates to A.Y. 2013-14. They further jointly state that in all these writ petitions the Assessment Ordersfor the relevant assessment years passed by the Assessing Authorities have beenchallenged. The petitioners have also challenged the order passed by theAssessing Authority on Stay Applications of the petitioners pending appeal. Learned counsels for the petitioners have admitted before us that against theimpugned assessment orders, the petitioners have filed appeals before the CIT(Appeals) under Section 246 A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 which are pending. It has been pointed out by learned senior standing counsel for the respondentsthat in terms of the Circular/Office Memorandum, dated 29.02.2016, thepetitioners have filed applications for stay before the Principal Commissioner ofIncome Tax, which are also pending. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that aggrieved with the orders passedby the Assessing Authority on Stay Applications, the petitioners have filedapplications before the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax in terms of para4 (C) of the Office Memorandum/Circular dated 29.02.2016, issued by theGovernment of India Ministry of Finance, Central Board of Direct Taxes, whichare pending. In view of the undisputed facts as briefly noted above, the present writ petitionsare frivolous writ petitions and the same are not entertainable. Against theimpugned Assessment Orders, the petitioners have filed appeals under Section246 A of the Act, 1961 which are pending. In these circumstances, the challenge to Assessment Orders can not beentertained. So far as challenge to orders passed by the Assessing Authority on stayapplications of the petitioners are concerned, it has been admitted before us thatthe petitioners have filed applications in terms of para 4(C) of the OfficeMemorandum/Circular, dated 29.02.2016, which are pending before thePrincipal Commissioner of Income Tax. In view of the undisputed facts as briefly noted above, the present writ petitionsare frivolous writ petitions and the same are not entertainable. Against theimpugned Assessment Orders, the petitioners have filed appeals under Section246 A of the Act, 1961 which are pending. In these circumstances, the challenge to Assessment Orders can not beentertained. So far as challenge to orders passed by the Assessing Authority on stayapplications of the petitioners are concerned, it has been admitted before us thatthe petitioners have filed applications in terms of para 4(C) of the OfficeMemorandum/Circular, dated 29.02.2016, which are pending before thePrincipal Commissioner of Income Tax. Under the circumstance, the challenge to orders passed on Stay Applications cannot be permitted to be made by filing the writ petition under Article 226 of theConstitution of India. For all the reasons aforestated, all the writ petitions are dismissed. Order Date :- 5.4.2022/vkg
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 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