LAXMI NIWAS SARDA vs. UNION OF INDIA

WPT/230/2023HC ChhattisgarhCGHC01033490202317 October 2023Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAKESH MOHAN PANDEY2 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition by directing respondent No. 2, the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NAFAC), Delhi, to consider and decide the petitioner's pending appeal on its merits in accordance with law. The Court mandated that this decision should be made as far as possible within an outer limit of 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. The Court did not delve into the merits of the appeal itself, nor did it make any findings on the validity of the assessment order or the grounds of appeal. The operative direction was solely to expedite the decision-making process by the appellate authority.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Laxmi Niwas Sarda, filed a writ petition seeking a direction for respondent No. 2, the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NAFAC), Delhi, to decide his pending appeal. The appeal was filed on January 28, 2019, against an assessment order for Assessment Year 2012-13. Written submissions were filed on January 14, 2021, but the appeal remained undecided. The petitioner's counsel stated that the appeal had not been decided for reasons unknown. The respondents' counsel attributed the delay to the National Faceless Scheme, stating that it takes time for records to be transferred or traced, preventing the disposal of the appeal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NAFAC) has unduly delayed the decision of the petitioner's appeal filed under Section 246A of the Income-Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2012-13. The petitioner argued that the appeal, filed on January 28, 2019, with written submissions on January 14, 2021, had not been decided by respondent No. 2 (NAFAC) to date, and sought a direction for its earliest disposal. The revenue (respondents No. 2 & 3) contended that the delay was due to the implementation of the National Faceless Scheme, which involves a new method of hearing and can cause delays in record transfer and traceability, thus impacting the timely disposal of appeals.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 246A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPT No. 230 of 2023 Laxmi Niwas Sarda S/o Late Shri Ratanlal Sarda Aged About 79 Years 2, White Church Road, Opp. Aaykar Bhawan, Indore (MP), Presently R/o Guru Kripa, Jain School Road, Ward No. 19, Wardhman Nagar, P.S. And P.O. And District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh, Pin - 491-441 ---- Petitioner Versus 1. Union Of India Through Secretary, Central Board Of Direct Taxes, Ministry Of Finance, Department Of Revenue, North Block, New Delhi 2. National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi Through Prinicpal Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax (Nafac), Delhi, North Block, New Delhi 3. Deputy Commissioner Of Incom Tax - 1(1) Room No. 115, Aaykar Bhawan Annex, White Churche Road, Indore (Mp) ---- Respondents For the Petitioner : Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, Advocate. For Respondents No.2 & 3 : Shri Ajay Kumrani, Advocate holding brief of Shri Amit Choudhari, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice

Rakesh Mohan Pandey

ORDER 18.10.2023 Heard. 1. 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. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the appeal was filed against the order of Assessment Year – 2012-13 on 28.1.2019 and on 14.1.2021 written submission was filed but till date, the appeal has not been decided for the reasons best known to respondent No.2.

2 3. At this stage, learned counsel for respondent 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 be disposed of. 4. 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 of a copy of this order. 5. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/-

(Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Nimmi

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →