TATA - Aldesa (JV) vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)

WP/17346/2025HC TelanganaHBHC01034667202523 June 2025Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA6 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed and disposed of the writ petitions at the admission stage. The Court directed Respondent No. 1, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, to ensure that the appeals preferred by the appellant are taken up for hearing at the earliest and disposed of preferably within a period of four months. The Court noted that the learned Standing Counsel for the department did not strongly oppose the prayer for early disposal. The responsibility was placed on the petitioner to ensure the uploading of the order passed by the High Court onto the respondents' portal. No order as to costs was made. The principle established is that High Courts can direct appellate authorities to expedite the disposal of long-pending appeals, especially when the revenue does not strongly object and the delay is substantial.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, TATA - Aldesa (JV), filed two writ petitions before the High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. These petitions concerned assessment years 2016-17 and 2015-16. The petitioner had filed appeals before the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) on January 24, 2019, and January 23, 2019, respectively. The core grievance was that despite the passage of over eight years and repeated reminders, these appeals had not been finalized. The assessment orders in both cases involved amounts exceeding one crore rupees each. The petitioner argued that as per CBDT circulars, such matters should be taken up expeditiously by the faceless authorities, or at least the assessee has a right to pray for an early disposal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, to expedite the hearing and disposal of the appeal bearing CIT(A) Hyderabad-6/10654/2018-19 for Assessment Year 2016-17, considering the delay of over eight years since filing. 2. Whether the High Court should issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, to expedite the hearing and disposal of the appeal bearing CIT(A) Hyderabad-6/10638/2018-19 for Assessment Year 2015-16, considering the delay of over eight years since filing. Assessee's Contentions: The petitioner argued that the appeals had been pending for over eight years, and despite repeated reminders, no finality had been reached. They relied on CBDT circulars which mandate expeditious disposal of matters, especially where the assessed amount is significant (over one crore rupees in each case). The petitioner sought an early disposal of the pending appeals. Revenue's Contentions: The learned Standing Counsel for the department did not strongly oppose the prayer of the petitioner for an early disposal of the appeals pending before the appellate authority.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

134471 HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA WRIT PETITION NOS: 17345 & 17346 OF 2025 W.P.NO: 17345 OF 2025 Between: TATA - Aldesa (lV), lst Floor, l,4ithona Towers - 1,1-7-80 to 87, Prenderghast Road, Secundeiabad - 500003 - Taal-Tana. Rep. by its Authorised Signatory, Kiran Dattaram Surve, S/o. Dattaram Mahipat Surve, Aged about 52 years, Rl/o. C '1 '1 10, Sanskar Tower, Neelam Nagar Phase 2, Opp. Jain ltrlandir, l/lulund East, Mumbai-40008 ..pETlTtoNER AND 1. The Commissioner of lncome Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi. 2. Deputy Commissioner of lncome Tax, Circte 6(1), Room No. 625, 6th Floor, lT Towers, AC Guards, Hyderabad - 500004. 3. The Principal Commissioner of lncome Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi ...RESP.NDENTS Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a wdt, order or direction, more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondent No- 1, Commissioner of lncome Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre to expedite the hearing and dispose the appeal bearing Clf (A), Hyderabad- 611065412018-19 for Assessment Year 2016-17. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI DHINAL SHAH FOR SRI T.PRADYOTH Counsel for the Respondents: M/s. BOKARO SAPNA REDDY' SENIOR SC INCOME TAX

.,{ W.P.NO: 17346 OF 2025 Between: TATA - Aldesa (JV), 1 st Floor, Mithona Towerr; - 1 1-7-80 to 87, Prenderghast Road, Secunderabad - 500003 - lelangana, Rep. by its Authorised Signatory, Kiran Dattaram Surve, S/o. D rttaram fvlahipat Surve, Aged about 52 years, R/o. C '1 110, Sanskar Tower, '(eelam Nagar Phase 2, Opp. Jain [\,4andir, ftrlulund East, Mumbai-400081 ...'ET.T,ONER AND 1. The Commissioner of lncome Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Alrpeal Centre, Delhi. 2. Deputy C.ommissioner of lncome Tax, Circle 6('1 ), Roorn No. 625, 6th Floor, lT Towers, AC Guards, Hyderabad - 500004. 3. The Principal Commissioner of lncome Tax, National I':aceless Appeal Centre, Delhi. ...RESPONDENTS Petition rnder Article 226 of the Constitution of lr dia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, th,-. High Corrt may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction, more particularll, in the nature of Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondent No. 1, Commis:-;ioner of lncome Tax (Appeals), Nati,rnal Faceless Appeal Centre to expedite tlre hearing and dispose the appeal bearing CIT(A) Hyderabad- 6/10638/2018-lg for Assessment Year 2015-16. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI DHINAL SHAH FOR SRI T.PRADYOTH Counsel for the Respondents: M/s. BOKARO SAPNA REDDY, SENIOR SC INCOME TAX The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER

ffi // ..., ,h THE I{ONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P'SAM KOSHY AND THE HoNouRABLE sni rusrtcu NARSING RAo NANDIKONDA w.P. COMMON oRDER Nos.l7345 & 11346 OF 2025 (per IIon'ble Sri .Justice P Sam Koshy) Heard Mr. Dhinal Shah' leamed counsel representtng Mr. T.Pradyoth, Iearned counsel lor the petitioner and Ms. B.Sapna Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department for the respondents Perused the record' 2. These are two corulected wlit petitions of the same assessee in respect of two different assessment orders' 3. Since the relief sought for in these two writ petitions are of identical nature, we take up of tl-rese two writ petitions for hearing and disPose ofbY a common order' 4. W.P.No.17345 of 2025 is in respect of the assessment year 2016-17 and W.P'No' I 7346 ol 2025 is in respect of the assessment year 2015-16. In both these writ petitions and in respect of the two assessment orders for the aforementioned two assessment years' the

2 contenrion of the learned counsel for the petition:r is that thev had preferrcd an appeal before 24.01.2019 and 23.01.2019 the faceless appel ate ar,rthority respectively for the assessrxent year 2016-l'; and2015-16. 5. The grievance of the petitioner is that thougJr more than eight years havc passed and in spite of repeated r.emirrders, the appeal has till date not been finalized and in bodr rhese r:ases. the assessmenl rrade by the depaftment is of rnore tharr one crore each and on that basis also in terms of the CBDT circu lar., th,: iaceless authorities have to take up the matter expeditiouslv or at Ieast the assessee has a right to pray for.early disposal olthe rppeal 6. Todar,. when the matter is taken up for hearing, ther learned Standing Counsel for the department does not stronrgly ol.rpose the prayer of tne learned counsel for the petitioner for an early disposai of the appeal pending before the appellate authority. 7. In vi,:w of the same, we do not find any good teason to keep the writ pctitions pending for the nature of reliel. sought lirr. Accordingll,, we allow and dispose of the writ pe titions at the on ,il-r

I 3 admission stage itself directing respondent No'l to ensure that the appeal preferred by the appellant is taken up for hearing at the earliest and dispose of the same preferably within a period of four months. 8. It is made clear that it will be the responsibility of the petitioner to ensure uploading ofthg'order passed by this Bench in these two writ petitions in the portat of the respondents' There shall be no order as to costs' Consequently,miscellaneouspetitionspending'ifany'shall stand closed. ,TRUE COPY// SD/. K.AMMAJI DEPUTY REqISTAAR sEcntl-dfFrcER I to ', The Commissioner of lncome Tax (Appeals)' National Faceless Appeal ' centie' oetni rr of lncome Tax' circle 6(1)' Room No 625' 6th Floor' lr '?S'l,:.J.%'-S-p!':',.i1"*y*i?[lt.'#3?i-;,,'onarFaceressAppearcentre, 3. The PrinciPal Comm t. 'gli':: E i,t',BmR['Jif$l'flEilB'f:3Efiio* '" INcoME rAX PSK toPUCl o. Two CD CoPies \ o.

HIGH COURT DATED:2310612025 -.-, . r,, . Itt COMMON ORDER WP.Nos.17345 & 17346 of 2025 16 $:P 2025 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS l, 'r- \r.-& \. *\ ? l,>1 t a a

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →