NEELAM MANDHANI vs. UNION OF INDIA

WPT/211/2024HC ChhattisgarhCGHC01042111202410 December 2024Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR VERMA2 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the respondent no. 2, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (NFAC), to consider and decide the pending appeal filed in Form No. 35 bearing ARN No. 592521510210422 within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order. The Court noted that the appeal was preferred on April 21, 2024. The writ petition was disposed of with these directions. No specific issue was left undecided, as the court only addressed the procedural delay.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Neelam Mandhani, filed a statutory appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) on April 21, 2024. The petitioner's sole grievance is that this appeal has not yet been considered and decided by the competent authority. The petitioner seeks a direction for the Appellate Authority to decide the pending appeal within a specified timeframe. The respondents did not raise any objection to the petitioner's submission.

What were the issues?

1. Whether a direction should be issued to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (NFAC) to consider and decide the pending statutory appeal filed by the petitioner within a stipulated period. The petitioner argues that the appeal was filed on April 21, 2024, and its expeditious disposal is sought. The revenue has not raised any objections to this request.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

2024:CGHC:48736

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPT No. 211 of 2024 1 - Neelam Mandhani W/o Mr. Manohar Mandhani Aged About 65 Years Permanent R/o D-27 Vasundhara, Shailendra Nagar, Raipur 492001, Chhattisgarh. --- Currently Residing At Villa No. 8 Ruqait Villas, Muslah Al Eid Street, Ras Al-Khaimah, Uae.

... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Union Of India Through Its Secretary Department Of Revenue, Ministry Of Finance, North Block, New Delhi – 110001. 2 - Commissionr Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi. 3 - The Principal Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax/ (Pccit) (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi. 4 - The Income Tax Officer Ward 1(2), Raipur, Office Of The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Officer Ward 1(2), Raipur, Raipur Central Revenue Building, Rai02, Rai03, Rai04, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 492001.

----Respondents For Appellants : Mr. Siddharth Dubey along with Mr. Tridib Bhattacharya, Advocates. For Respondent : Mr. Ajay Kumrani on behalf of Mr. Amit Chaudhari, Adv. Hon’ble Shri

Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge

Order on Board 11/12/2024 1. The limited grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner preferred statutory appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) on 21.04.2024, but the same has not been considered and

2 decided by the competent authority till date. 2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that a direction may be issued to the Appellate Authority to consider and decide the pending appeal within a stipulated period of time as the appeal was preferred on 21.04.2024. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondents raised no objection to the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner. 4. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and have perused the documents annexed with the writ petition. 5. Considering the limited grievance of the petitioner, it would be appropriate to direct the respondent no. 2, i.e., Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (NFAC) to consider and decide the pending appeal filed in Form No. 35 bearing ARN No. 592521510210422 within a further period of 90 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order keeping in mind the fact that the appeal was preferred on 21.04.2024. 6. With the aforesaid observations/directions, the writ petition stand disposed of

Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Jyoti

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →