RISHAB KUMAR KHANDAKA S/O SHRI KUBER KHANDAKA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

CW/3796/2020HC RajasthanRJHC02019251202017 December 2024Bench: INDERJEET SINGH,VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI2 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court, without commenting on the merits of the case, acknowledged the significant delay in deciding the petitioner's appeal. Taking into account that interim protection had been in favour of the petitioner since 2020 and that the appeal had remained undecided for over four years, the Court disposed of the writ petition. The operative direction was for the first Appellate Authority to decide the appeal within three months from the date of receiving a certified copy of the order. The Court also stipulated that any existing interim order would continue until the appeal was decided. No specific issue was left undecided; the court focused on procedural relief.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Rishab Kumar Khandaka, filed a writ petition seeking a direction for the expeditious disposal of his appeal pending before the Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(1), Jaipur. The petitioner's grievance stemmed from an order dated February 10, 2020, which directed him to deposit 20% of the demand raised. The High Court had previously issued a notice of motion and restrained the respondents from recovering the outstanding demand based on the assessment order dated December 11, 2019. The core issue was the delay in hearing the petitioner's appeal, which had been pending since December 2019.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal pending before the first appellate authority should be decided expeditiously, considering the delay in its disposal? (Question of procedure and administrative efficiency) Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that despite his appeal being pending since December 2019, it had not been heard, necessitating a direction for expeditious disposal. The petitioner relied on the fact that interim protection had been in his favour since 2020, indicating a prolonged delay. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the revenue regarding the delay in the appeal's disposal. The focus was on the court's direction for speedy resolution.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

[2024:RJ-JP:51879-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3796/2020 Rishab Kumar Khandaka S/o Shri Kuber Khandaka, Aged About 24 Years, Resident Of 25, Mehandi Ka Chowk, Ramganj, Jaipur Rajasthan 302003. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 6(1), Jaipur, Having Its Office At New Central Revenue Building, Statue Circle, Bhagwan Das Road, C-Scheme, Jaipur In The State Of Rajasthan. 2. Central Board Of Direct Taxes, Having Its Address At North Block, New Delhi Through Its Chairman. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Apeksha Bapna with Mr. Rohan Chatter for Mr. Siddharth Ranka For Respondent(s) : Mr. Anuroop Singhi with Mr. N.S. Bhati & Mr. Aditya Khandelwal Mr. Sandeep Pathak HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI Order 17/12/2024 1. This petition is filed seeking direction to respondent- department to decide the appeal expeditiously. 2. The grievance raised is against the order dated 10.02.2020 directing the petitioner to deposit 20% of the demand created. 3. While issuing notice of motion by this Court, the respondents were restrained from recovering of outstanding demand on the basis of assessment order dated 11.12.2019. The only issue

[2024:RJ-JP:51879-DB] (2 of 2) [CW-3796/2020] remains is that in spite of the appeal being pending since December, 2019, till date the appeal has not been heard. 4. Without commenting upon merits of the case, taking into account that there is interim protection in favour of the petitioner since year 2020 and for more than last four years, the appeal has not been decided, the petition is disposed of with direction to the first Appellate Authority to decide the appeal within three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Till then, interim order, if any, shall continue. (VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J (INDERJEET SINGH),J SAHIL SONI /87

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →