SURESH KUMAR GUPTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 43(1), NEW DELHI & ORS.

PDF · subscribers
W.P.(C)/14897/2026HC DelhiDLHC01048606202609 October 2026Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA,HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE ADITI CHOUDHARY2 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The Delhi High Court directed the appellate authority to consider the petitioner's early hearing application dated 25.09.2026 in accordance with law. The Court also requested the appellate authority to try and fix the appeal for hearing at an early date. The reasoning was based on the petitioner being a senior citizen and a retired professional against whom a substantial demand had been raised. The writ petition was disposed of with these observations. The operative direction was to consider the early hearing application and attempt to schedule the appeal for an early hearing. No specific issue was left undecided, as the Court focused on procedural expediting.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Suresh Kumar Gupta, a 73-year-old senior citizen, filed a writ petition before the Delhi High Court challenging the delay in the disposal of his appeal against an assessment order dated 23.05.2023. This order raised a demand of Rs. 11,02,31,536/-. The petitioner argued that his appeal has been pending for over 3 years and an application for early hearing, filed on 25.09.2026, had not been considered. He also contended that the assessment order appears to be time-barred and that he has already deposited or had recovered more than 20% of the disputed amount. The petitioner sought a direction for the appellate authority to decide his appeal expeditiously.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should direct the appellate authority to decide the pending appeal expeditiously, considering the petitioner's age and the substantial demand raised against him? (Question of mixed law and fact, concerning procedural fairness and timely adjudication). Assessee's Contentions: - The appeal has been pending for over 3 years. - An application for early hearing filed on 25.09.2026 has not been considered. - The petitioner is a senior citizen aged 73 years. - A substantial demand of Rs. 11,02,31,536/- has been raised. - The assessment order appears to be time-barred. - More than 20% of the demand has been deposited or recovered. - A direction should be issued to the appellate authority for expeditious disposal of the appeal. Revenue's Contentions: - No specific contentions from the revenue are recorded in the judgment.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010486062026 + W.P.(C) 14897/2026 & CM APPL. 69993/2026

SURESH KUMAR GUPTA

.....Petitioner

Through: Ms. Sejal Arora, Mr. Sumit

Halchandani, Ms. Ananya Kapoor,

Advocates.

versus

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 43(1),

NEW DELHI & ORS.

.....Respondents

Through: Mr. Puneet Rai SSC, Mr. Ashvini

Kumar JSC, Ms. Nancy Jain,

Advocates.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE ADITI CHOUDHARY

09.10.2026 O R D E R 1. Learned Counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner’s appeal against the assessment order dated 23.05.2023 is pending consideration before the appellate authority for more than 3 years and in spite of the fact that the petitioner has moved an application for early hearing on 25.09.2026, the same has not been taken up for consideration. Copy of the early hearing application has been produced for perusal of the Court; the same is taken on record. 2. Learned Counsel for petitioner further submitted that the petitioner is a senior citizen of 73 years of age and by way of the impugned order dated 23.05.2023, a huge demand of Rs.11,02,31,536/- has been raised against him. She further submitted that the assessment order is apparently time This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 14/10/2026 at 11:34:55

barred and more than 20% of the amount has been deposited or recovered from by the petitioner. 3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner prayed that a direction be issued to the appellate authority to decide the appeal expeditiously. 4. Having heard the learned Counsel for the parties and considering that the petitioner is a senior citizen and a retired professional against whom a substantial demand has been raised, we direct the appellate authority to consider the petitioner’s early hearing application dated 25.09.2026 in accordance with law and try to fix the appeal for hearing at an early date. 5. With these observations, writ petition stands disposed of, accordingly. 6. Pending application also stands disposed of.

DINESH MEHTA, J

ADITI CHOUDHARY, J

OCTOBER 9, 2026/naw This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 14/10/2026 at 11:34:55

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →