BISHNOI BROTHERS HOTELS AND RESORTS PVT. LTD. vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court, without commenting on the merits of the case, acknowledged the significant delay in deciding the appeal, which had been pending for over five years. The Court noted that interim protection had been in place since 2019. Consequently, the petition was disposed of with a direction to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to decide the appeal within three months from the date of receiving a certified copy of the order. The interim protection granted to the petitioner was extended to continue until the appeal was heard and decided. The Court's reasoning was primarily based on the need for timely resolution of appeals and the prolonged period of pendency.
What were the facts?
The petitioner, Bishnoi Brothers Hotels And Resorts Pvt. Ltd., filed a writ petition before the Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench, seeking a direction for the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to expeditiously decide their pending appeal. The grievance stemmed from an order dated 12.02.2019, which directed the petitioner to deposit 20% of the demand raised by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax based on an assessment order dated 27.12.2018. The High Court had granted interim protection to the petitioner on 03.04.2019, restraining the recovery of the outstanding demand. The core issue was the inordinate delay in the disposal of the appeal, which had been pending since January 2019.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) should be directed to decide the pending appeal expeditiously, considering the delay of over five years since its filing in January 2019? (Question of procedure and administrative efficiency). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that despite the appeal being filed in January 2019, it had not been heard and decided by the appellate authority, leading to an undue delay. They sought a direction for expeditious disposal. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the revenue. However, the revenue was represented by counsel, implying their participation in the proceedings.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
Order 06/03/2025
This petition is filed seeking direction to respondent No.2 to decide the appeal expeditiously.
The grievance raised is against the order dated 12.02.2019 directing the petitioner to deposit 20% of the demand created.
[2025:RJ-JP:9992-DB] (2 of 2) [CW-5464/2019]
While issuing notice of motion on 03.04.2019, the respondents were restrained from recovering of outstanding demand on the basis of assessment order dated 27.12.2018. The only issue remains is that inspite of the appeal being pending since January, 2019, till date the appeal has not been heard.
Without commenting upon merits of the case, taking into account that there is interim protection in favour of the petitioner since 2019 and for more than last five 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. The interim protection shall continue till the appeal is heard. (MANEESH SHARMA),J (AVNEESH JHINGAN),J Deepa/Chandan-25
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Capri Global Capital LTD Through Represented By Its Law Officer Mr. Varun Kaljoria vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh Through Principal SecretaryMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Sri Tatiparthy Venkata Swamy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 25 Oct 2026
- Piyush Shantilal Veera vs. State Of U.P.Allahabad · 23 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Pooja Shri Traders vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - 1Madras · 23 Oct 2026
- Aashutosh vs. The State Of Madhy PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 23 Oct 2026
