KAMA REAL ESTATE HOLDINGS LLP vs. PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI 20 & ORS.

PDF · subscribers
W.P.(C)/876/2026HC DelhiDLHC01001767202621 January 2026Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The Delhi High Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, to consider the petitioner's application for early hearing dated November 20, 2025. The court instructed the NFAC to decide the appeal as early as possible, preferably within a period of three months from the date of the order, taking into account the CBDT circular mandating timely disposal of appeals with a tax effect exceeding Rs. 1 Crore. The court acknowledged that in normal circumstances, it would not direct an appellate authority to expedite proceedings but did so in this case due to the substantial demand pending against the petitioner and the fact that the appeal had already been heard on nine occasions. The Senior Standing Counsel for the revenue was directed to forward a copy of the order to all concerned.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Kama Real Estate Holdings LLP, filed a writ petition before the Delhi High Court challenging the inordinate delay in the disposal of its appeal by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), specifically the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi. The appeal was filed on January 21, 2020, and despite nine hearings, it remained pending. The petitioner brought to the appellate authority's attention a CBDT Circular dated March 7, 2024, which mandates that appeals involving a tax effect of over Rs. 1 Crore should be decided within three months. An application for early hearing was filed on November 20, 2025, but no date was fixed. The court noted a substantial demand was due against the petitioner.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, has unduly delayed the disposal of the petitioner's appeal, which was filed on January 21, 2020, despite multiple hearings and the pendency of a substantial demand against the petitioner? (Mixed question of law and fact). Assessee's Contentions: The petitioner argued that the delay in deciding its appeal is unacceptable, especially in light of the CBDT Circular F. No. 279/Misc./M-102/2021-ITJ dated March 7, 2024. This circular stipulates that appeals with a tax effect exceeding Rs. 1 Crore should be decided within three months. The petitioner highlighted that an application for early hearing was filed on November 20, 2025, but no hearing date has been scheduled. Revenue's Contentions: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the revenue.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~82 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 876/2026 CM APPL. 4294/2026 CM APPL. 4295/2026

KAMA REAL ESTATE HOLDINGS LLP .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Satyen Sethi and Mr. Arta Trana Panda, Advs.

versus

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI 20 & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Abhishek Maratha, Sr. Standing Counsel, Mr. Apoorv Agarwal, Ms Nupur Sharma, Jr. SCs, Mr. Gaurav Singh, Mr. Bhanukaran Singh Jodha, Ms Muskaan Goel, Mr. Himanshu Gaur, Mr. Gaurav Kumar Arya and Mr. Pushpag Shah Johrari, Advs.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR

21.01.2026 O R D E R 1. The petitioner has approached this court with a grievance, which on the face of it, looks to be minor but has turned out to be a major grievance in the case of the petitioner inasmuch as its appeal, which was filed on 21.01.2020 is still pending consideration of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) despite the fact that hearing has taken place on nine occasions. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in light of the Circular F. No. 279/Misc./M-102/2021-ITJ issued by the Central Board of 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 23/01/2026 at 12:32:20

Direct Taxes(CBDT) dated 07.03.2024, any appeal which involves tax effect of more than Rs.1 Crore, should be decided within three months. He contended that this fact has been brought to the notice of the Appellate Authority by way of an application for early hearing dated 20.11.2025, but no date of hearing has been fixed so far. 3. In normal circumstances, we would not have directed the Appellate Authority to decide the appeal expeditiously, as we are not aware of the pendency and other priorities of the said Appellate Authority. 4. But considering that a substantial demand is due against the petitioner and that it has been heard on 9 occasions, we dispose of the present writ petition by directing the Appellate Authority namely National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (Respondent no.3) to consider petitioner’s application for early hearing dated 20.11.2025 in light of the CBDT circular referred herein above and decide the appeal as early as possible preferably within a period of three months from today. 5. It shall be required of Mr. Abhishek Maratha, learned Senior Standing Counsel to forward the copy of this order to all concerned. 6. Writ petition and all pending applications are disposed of.

DINESH MEHTA, J

VINOD KUMAR, J JANUARY 21, 2026/dd

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 23/01/2026 at 12:32:20

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →