Facts of the Case

The petitioner had initiated a series of legal challenges against the revenue authorities by filing multiple writ petitions before the Hon’ble Delhi High Court, specifically WP (C) No. 8282/2009, 8338/2009, and 8339/2009. These petitions were filed under the extraordinary jurisdiction of the Court to challenge specific tax assessments or procedural orders passed by the respondents. While these petitions were pending adjudication before the High Court, the petitioner concurrently pursued the statutory appellate route by filing appeals before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The appellate authority subsequently examined the merits of the petitioner's grievances in those proceedings and granted the necessary relief to the petitioner

Issues Involved

 The central issue pertained to the sustainability of the writ petitions in light of parallel proceedings that were simultaneously moving forward before the appellate authorities, specifically the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals).

Petitioner’s Arguments: Appearing for the petitioner, Learned Senior Advocate Mr. Harish Malhotra, assisted by Mr. Rajender Aggarwal, formally apprised the Court of the developments at the appellate level. He submitted that since the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) had already ruled in favor of the appellant and granted the relief originally sought in the writ petitions, the petitions themselves no longer required adjudication. Consequently, he sought the Court's permission to withdraw the petitions.

Respondent’s Arguments: The Respondents, represented by counsel Ms. Prem Lata Bansal and Mr. Pankaj Batra, were present for the proceedings. The consensus regarding the outcome of the appellate orders rendered the continuation of these writ petitions unnecessary.

 

Court Order/Findings: The Hon’ble Division Bench, presided over by Justice A.K. Sikri and Justice Suresh Kait, noted that the petitioner sought permission to withdraw the petitions. Finding that the petitions had become "infructuous" due to the relief already granted by the CIT (Appeals), the Court allowed the withdrawal and dismissed the petitions.

Important Clarification: This order underscores the principle that where an alternative statutory remedy (such as an appeal) provides the complete relief sought, the extraordinary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India may not be pressed, as the matter becomes academic or infructuous.

 

Sections Involved: The matter involved Article 226 of the Constitution of India, which empowers High Courts to issue writs, and the procedural frameworks governing income tax appeals and civil writ petitions.

 

Link to download the order  https://delhihighcourt.nic.in/app/case_number_pdf/2010:DHC:14077-DB/AKS01112010CW83382009_145527.pdf


Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.