GOLCHHA PROMOTERS DEVELOPERS AND BUILDERS PVT. LTD. vs. UNION OF INDIA

WPT/15/2025HC ChhattisgarhCGHC01004551202530 January 2025Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE NARESH KUMAR CHANDRAVANSHI2 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur disposed of the writ petition by directing Respondent No. 2, the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), to consider and decide the petitioner's pending appeal on its merits. The Court mandated that the decision should be made in accordance with the law as far as possible within an outer limit of 60 days from the date of receipt or submission of a copy of the order. The reasoning for the delay, as presented by the revenue concerning the National Faceless Scheme and record transfer issues, was acknowledged but did not prevent the Court from issuing a time-bound direction for disposal. No specific finding was made on the merits of the appeal itself, as the petition was primarily for a direction to decide.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Golchha Promoters Developers And Builders Pvt. Ltd., filed a writ petition seeking a direction to Respondent No. 2, the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), to decide its pending appeal. The appeal was filed under Section 246A of the Income-Tax Act, 1961, against an order for Assessment Year 2008-09. The appeal was filed on April 18, 2016, and written submissions were made, but the appeal remained undecided. The petitioner's counsel stated that the delay was for reasons unknown to them. The respondents' counsel attributed the delay to the new National Faceless Scheme, stating that records were not transferred or traceable, which prevented the appeal from being disposed of.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) has unduly delayed the decision on the petitioner's appeal filed under Section 246A of the Income-Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2008-09. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that their appeal, filed on April 18, 2016, with written submissions, had not been decided by Respondent No. 2 (NFAC) to date, and the reasons for this delay were unknown to them. Revenue's Contention: The respondents' counsel submitted that the delay was due to the implementation of the National Faceless Scheme, which caused issues with the transfer and traceability of records, thereby hindering the timely disposal of the petitioner's appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 246A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

2025:CGHC:5765

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPT No. 15 of 2025 Golchha Promoters Developers And Builders Pvt. Ltd. Through Director Akshay Golchha, Regd. Office At 53, Jalvihar Colony, Raipur Chhattisgarh

... Petitioner versus 1 - Union Of India Ministry Of Finance, Department Of Income Tax, New Delhi 2 - National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) New Delhi 3 - Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-1 Income Tax Department, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgrh 4 - Assessing Officer Income Tax Officer 1(1), Ward-1(1), Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

... Respondents (Cause title, as taken from CIS) For Petitioner : Mr. Ashish Surana, counsel through video conferencing For Respondents No.2 to 4 : Mr. Ajay Kumrani, counsel appears on behalf of Mr. Amit Choudhari, counsel (Hon’ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Order on Board 31/01/2025 1. Heard. 2. The limited relief that the petitioner has sought for in the present petition is a direction to respondent No.2 to consider and decide the pending appeal filed under Section 246A of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 at the earliest.

2 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the appeal was filed against the order of Assessment Year – 2008-09 on 18.4.2016 and written submission was filed but till date, the appeal has not been decided for the reasons best known to respondent No.2. 4. At this stage, learned counsel for respondents would submit that on account of new method of hearing i.e. National Faceless Scheme, it takes time and records have not been transferred or traceable, therefore, the appeal preferred by the petitioner could not have disposed of. 5. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, the present writ petition as of now is disposed of directing respondent No.2 to ensure that the appeal of the petitioner which has been filed is considered and decided on its merits in accordance with law as far as possible within an outer limit of 60 days from the date of receipt/submission of a copy of this order. 6. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/-

(Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi)

JUDGE Rukhsar

RUKHSAR BANO Digitally signed by RUKHSAR BANO Date: 2025.02.04 10:46:51 +0530

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →