Jeevraj Patel v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 3(2), Hyderabad & Ors.

1. FACTS OF THE CASE

Jeevraj Patel challenged the section 144 assessment dated 20 March 2023 for AY 2021-22. The writ alleged illegality and breach of natural justice; an interim application sought suspension of the assessment and demand.

Source: PDF pp.1–3, prayer and paragraph 2

2. DISCUSSION BY THE COURT

On perusing the record, the Court found that the authorities had considered the petitioner’s documents and submissions, which involved factual aspects. It therefore declined to entertain the writ at that stage and reserved the statutory appeal route.

Source: PDF p.3, paragraph 3

3. JUDICIAL DECISION

Because the petitioner had approached the Court immediately against the assessment, the period spent before the High Court was directed to be excluded when counting limitation for the appeal.

Source: PDF p.4, paragraph 4

4. OUTCOME

The writ was rejected with the right to appeal in accordance with law, without costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions were closed. The assessment was not quashed and no continuing recovery stay was granted by the final order.

Source: PDF p.4, paragraph 5 and closing direction

5. Expert Comments

AKHB editorial analysis, distinct from the Court’s findings.

Factual examination belongs in the appeal here

The Court’s reason was that documents and submissions had been considered and the remaining dispute touched facts. Its refusal to exercise writ jurisdiction is not a substantive endorsement of every assessment finding; the reserved appeal is where those findings can be challenged.

Source: PDF p.3, paragraph 3

Exclusion is not unlimited condonation

The direction removes the period actually spent in the High Court from the limitation calculation. It does not specify a new fixed appeal deadline or excuse all delay after disposal, so the appeal chronology must identify the excluded period accurately.

Source: PDF p.4, paragraph 4

The interim prayer is not the final relief

The request to suspend assessment and demand appears in the application, but the final order rejects the writ and closes miscellaneous petitions. Treating that request as a granted stay would reverse the operative result.

Source: PDF p.2, IA prayer; p.4, final order