Delhi High Court Declines Writ Jurisdiction Over Section 143(3) Assessment Order Where Statutory Appeal Was Pending

The Case

M/S RAJ SHEELA GROWTH FUND PVT LTD Vs INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 21 (1) DELHI
Case No.: W.P.(C)/13737/2026
Decided on: 09/18/2026
CNR: DLHC010444892026 ·
High Court of Delhi

The Legal Issue

The petitioner challenged an assessment order dated 31.12.2019 passed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by way of a writ petition, while its statutory appeal against that order had been pending before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) since 24.01.2020. The Court was asked whether it should exercise its discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, particularly when the petitioner claimed that this Court had already held in its own case that the respondent Income Tax Officer, Ward 21(1), Delhi does not have jurisdiction to assess it. The respondent raised a preliminary objection that the writ petition impugns an assessment order passed way back on 31.12.2019 and that the petitioner, having already availed the statutory remedy of appeal, cannot avail or pursue two remedies simultaneously.

Facts of the Case

The petitioner, M/S Raj Sheela Growth Fund Pvt Ltd, challenged the assessment order dated 31.12.2019 passed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner had already availed the statutory remedy of appeal, which was pending before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) since 24.01.2020. The respondent raised a preliminary objection that the writ petition impugned an assessment order passed way back on 31.12.2019 and that the assessee cannot avail or pursue two remedies simultaneously. The petitioner's counsel submitted that the petitioner approached the Court on the issue of jurisdiction, claiming that this Court had already held in the petitioner's favour that the respondent Income Tax Officer, Ward 21(1), Delhi does not have jurisdiction to assess the petitioner. He invited the Court's attention to the judgment dated 08.05.2024 delivered in ITA 124/2020 and W.P.(C) 3777/2022 for Assessment Year 2015-16 passed in the petitioner's own case.

Summary of the Decision

The Court, having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering that the petitioner had already availed the statutory remedy of appeal, was not inclined to exercise its discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. However, considering that the petitioner's appeal was pending since January 2020 and the petitioner's claim that the issue on the jurisdictional aspect had been set at rest by this Court vide its judgment dated 08.05.2024, the Court requested the CIT(A) to decide the petitioner's appeal within a period of two months, in case the petitioner places a certified copy of the instant order before the Appellate Authority along with an early hearing application. The petitioner was free to place a copy of the judgment dated 08.05.2024 passed by this Court before the CIT(A) also, so that he can decide the appeal on the issue of jurisdiction as well as the other issues which the petitioner had canvassed before him. With these observations, the writ petition stands disposed of. All pending applications stand disposed of. The Court observed that it had not pronounced upon the merits or otherwise of the petitioner's contentions, and the CIT(A) would be free to take an independent view of the petitioner's contentions in so far as the applicability of the judgment dated 08.05.2024 passed by this Court on the extant facts is concerned.

This digest is for quick reference only and is not legal advice. Always verify against the full judgment.