Shamir Hussain Elchi vs. Central Board Of Direct Taxes

WP/43131/2025HC Madhya Pradesh21 November 2025Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL MISHRA2 pages

For Petitioner: Mudit MaheshwariFor Respondent: Additional Solicitor General[R-1]

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court, considering the submissions, deemed it expedient to dispose of the writ petition without entering into the merits of the case. The Court issued a direction to Respondent No. 2 to consider and decide the pending appeal of the petitioner within a period of 2 months from the date of filing of a copy of the order passed by the High Court. The principle established is that when a statutory appeal is pending for an inordinate period, the High Court, in its writ jurisdiction, can direct the appellate authority to decide the appeal within a specified timeframe, without adjudicating the underlying merits of the appeal itself. No issue was expressly left undecided, as the court focused solely on the procedural aspect of directing the decision of the pending appeal.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Shamir Hussain Elchi, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Indore, seeking a direction to Respondent No. 2 (an authority under the Income Tax Act) to decide his pending appeal. The appeal was filed on December 19, 2019, under Section 250(6A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petition was filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The respondents were the Central Board of Direct Taxes and others. The High Court considered the submissions made by both parties.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should direct Respondent No. 2 to decide the pending appeal of the petitioner, which was filed on 19.12.2019 under Section 250(6A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that his appeal, filed on December 19, 2019, under Section 250(6A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was pending and sought a direction for its expeditious decision. Revenue's Contention: The judgment records that the respondents were represented by the Additional Solicitor General, but their specific contentions regarding the delay or the merits of the appeal are not recorded in the provided text.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250(6A)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA) JUDGE (ALOK AWASTHI) JUDGE IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA & HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ALOK AWASTHI ON THE 21st OF NOVEMBER, 2025 WRIT PETITION No. 43131 of 2025 SHAMIR HUSSAIN ELCHI Versus CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES AND OTHERS Appearance: Shri Mudit Maheshwari - Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Sunil Kumar Jain - Additional Solicitor General for the respondents. ORDER Per: Justice Vijay Kumar Shukla In the instant petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner is seeking a direction to the respondent No.2 to decide the pending appeal of the petitioner which was filed on 19.12.2019 under the provisions of Section 250 (6A) of Income Tax Act, 1961. Considering the aforesaid submissions, we deem it expedient to dispose of the petition without entering into the merits of the case with a direction to the respondent No.2 to consider and decide the pending appeal of the petitioner within a period of 2 months from the date of filing of copy of the order passed today. With the aforesaid direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. Divyansh 1 WP-43131-2025 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:33886 Signed by: DIVYANSH SHUKLA Signing time: 21-Nov-25 3:25:55 PM Signature Not Verified

2 WP-43131-2025 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:33886 Signed by: DIVYANSH SHUKLA Signing time: 21-Nov-25 3:25:55 PM Signature Not Verified

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →