DARSHAN LAL HUF vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AND OTHERS
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court did not decide the merits of the petitioner's appeal against the assessment order. Instead, the court accepted the submission made by the learned counsel for the respondents. The respondents assured the court that the petitioner's appeal would be decided within a period of 04 months from the date of receipt of a copy of the High Court's order. This assurance satisfied the petitioner's counsel. Therefore, the High Court disposed of the writ petition based on this undertaking, without delving into the substantive issues of the original appeal.
What were the facts?
The petitioner, Darshan Lal, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana seeking directions for the expeditious disposal of his appeal. This appeal was filed to challenge an assessment order dated 23.03.2024, passed by the Income Tax Department. The respondents, represented by the Commissioner of Income Tax and others, were the authorities against whom the petition was filed. The procedural history involves the petitioner filing an appeal against an assessment order and then approaching the High Court for a direction to decide that appeal.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the High Court should issue directions to the Income Tax Commissioner to expeditiously decide the petitioner's appeal against the assessment order dated 23.03.2024. (Question of procedure/administration). The petitioner argued for the issuance of directions to ensure timely resolution of his appeal. The revenue, through its counsel, submitted that the appeal would be decided within 04 months from the receipt of a copy of the order. No specific legal provisions were cited by either party in their arguments.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-15571-2026 Date of decision: 15.07.2026 Sr. No.114 Darshan Lal …..Petitioner VERSUS Commissioner of Income Tax and Ors. ….Respondents CORAM:- HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Present: Mr. Deepak Aggarwal, Advocate and Mr. Sanjeev K. Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Ranvijay Singh, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Vidul Kapoor, Jr. Standing Counsel for the respondent(s). ***** DEEPAK SIBAL, J. (ORAL) 1. Through this petition the petitioner seeks issuance of directions to respondent No.1 to expeditiously decide the petitioner’s appeal filed to challenge therein assessment order dated 23.03.2024 (Annexure P-1). 2. At the outset, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the petitioner’s aforesaid appeal shall be decided within 04 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 3. The afore statement made by learned counsel for the respondents satisfies the learned counsel for the petitioner. 4. Disposed of.
(DEEPAK SIBAL) JUDGE (RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL)
JUDGE 15.07.2026 puneet i) Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No ii) Whether reportable? Yes/No PUNEET SHARMA 2026.07.16 16.11 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S.Sidhivinayak Roadways, Sundergarh vs. Commissioner Of GST And Central Excise, Rourkela Commissionerate, RourkelaOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Dillip Kumar Behera vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, Mayurbhanj CircleOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Kalinga Paper Mart, Sundergarh vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, CuttackOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Kabita Nayak vs. Chief Commissioner, CGST, Central Excise And Customs, KhurdaOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Swastika Ingot PVT.LTD, Sundargarh vs. The Addl Commissioner, GST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
