M/s Kantar GDC India Private Limited vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

PDF · subscribers
WP/8870/2026HC TelanganaHBHC01007243202626 March 2026Bench: APARESH KUMAR SINGH,G.M. MOHIUDDIN5 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition without going into the merits of the case. The Court issued a direction to the respondent NFAC to dispose of the petitioner's appeal within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order, provided the appeal had not already been disposed of. No order as to costs was made. The principle here is that the High Court, in its writ jurisdiction, can direct statutory authorities to perform their duties within a reasonable timeframe when there is an undue delay in adjudication, without delving into the substantive issues of the appeal itself. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, were also directed to stand closed.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, M/s Kantar GDC India Private Limited (formerly TNS India Private Limited), filed a writ petition before the High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. The grievance was the non-passing of an order on a statutory appeal filed on June 11, 2018. This appeal was against an order passed by the Assessing Officer on April 24, 2018, under Section 143(3) read with Section 254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner had also filed an early hearing application before the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) for the disposal of the pending appeal. The respondents are various income tax authorities, including the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax and the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should issue a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to dispose of the petitioner's statutory appeal in a time-bound manner? (Question of law and fact, concerning the procedural efficacy of the appeal process under the Income Tax Act, 1961). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that their statutory appeal, filed on June 11, 2018, against an order dated April 24, 2018, had remained un-adjudicated. They sought a direction for the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and NFAC to dispose of the appeal expeditiously. Revenue's Contention: The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department submitted that if the Court directed, the appeal would be disposed of within a period of four months.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 254

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

ll IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE.STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (SPecial Original J urisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT ax, Circle .3 [ 3488 I Bhawan 500004. Ministry of THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUS.flCE SRI APARESH TUUNN SINGH AND THE HONOURABLE SNT JUSTrcE G.M. MOHIUDDIN Between: M/s Kantar GDC lndia Private Limited, (formerly. known as TNS lndia Private Limited) office 1B:'il[;t tn;i.iitritr]Ji"a(6r A' lnternational rech Park' Hitech city, Madhiprii"sndilbtt,: HvOLiiUdo, Telangana' lndia, 500081 Rep. by its nut#rizfi'lg;tAeritativE Hirini Slranvan, D/o Vasudevan Venkatachar, Aged about 55.years, 6i"l rijlWir"iWinti' l ith Floor' Block A' rnternational r"rt -Fliii,- Hit;h- diri: 'tr,l'aohapur, Shaikpet, Hvderabad, t"ianganr, lndia, 500081' ...PETITIONER AND 1. 2. 3. 2( of 4 Opposite National of tog 1 Finance, lncome Tax'2, Signature Towers, Kondapur, 5. PrinciPal Commissioner of Hyderabad , Telangana - 500084. ...RESPONDENTS Petition underArticle226ottheConstitutionoflndiaprayingthatinthe circumstancesstatedintheaffidavitfiledtherewith' the High Court rnaY be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction, more pa in the Mandamus declaring and directing the ResPondents and disPosal of the appeal in a time bound manner' for the appgal was filed ,,. against the consequential order dated 24t}4t2018 giving effect to the Order of the Honourable lncome Tax APPellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 254 of the lncome Tax Acl' 1961 such' ,i.i i I it'l I . , .:,, ':,.. .. .,.. - r -t::,r.i:.r.+it .fiili":!.rEl {:!' .++;i:!F.H #G;r'i#;"t*,iffi

further and otl-rer reliefs, including costs of this Petition, as this Honourable Court may deem fit and proper in the nature and circumstances of the case' Counsel for ttre Petitioner: Ms. ANANYA KAPOOR FOR SRI T'PRADYOTH Counsel for the Respondents: Ms. J.SUNITHA, SR. SC FOR INCOM TAX The Court made the following: ORDER 1liiI l, . ,. - -.- ',<:L .i+ 1 -- .....i._- I_. jr. .' . . riiri:::,., _...,t .. : ... . _ .-:r.-i. .,:,:' I., i, .. , ;r.ri;,-ii:.6.j,.i i. :.,s *l :- .i'; 1., . r., : :'.::.r; :.,.

i i TN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APARESH KUMAR SINGH AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTTCE G.M.MOHIUDDIN WRIT PETITION No.8870 of 2026 DATED z 26.03.2026 Between M/s. Kantar GDC India Private Limited, (fonnerly known as TNS lndia Private Limited) Rep., by its Authorized Representative Harini Saranyan, Hyderabad. Petitioner AND Deputy Commissioner of lncome Tax, Circle 2( I ), Hyderabad and 4 others. Respondents ORDER: Heard Ms. Ananya Kapoor, learned counsel representing Mr. T. Pradyoth, learned counsel for the petitioner, appears through video conferencing and Ms. J. Sunitha, learned Senior Standing Counsel appears for lncome Tax Department. 2. The simple grievance of the petitioner is against non-passing of order on the statutory appeal preferred by it on 11.06.2018 against the order passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 254 of the Income Tax Act, 196l by the Assessing Officer on 24.04.2018. The petitioner's statutory appeal has \ remained un-adjudicated though it has filed an early hearing application

2 before the l{ational Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) for disposal of the pending appr:al. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a direction may be issued upon the Commissioner of lncome Tax (Appeals) and NFAC to dispose of ttre appeal in a time bound manner. 4. Leanted Senior Standing Counsel for the lncome Tax Department submits that. if this Court so directs, the appeal would be disposed of within a period of four months. 5. In th.at view of the matter, without going into the merits of the case, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction upon the respondent NFAC to dispose of the appeal, if not already disposed of, within a period of four months fro:n the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order as to costs. Mis,:ellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. SD/- B.REKHA RANI ANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY/ SECTION OFFICER To 1. Deput'y Commissioner of lncome Tax, Circle 2( of Towers, Sy.No. 6(P) of Konda Gardens, Serlingampally (M), Comnrissioner of lncome Tax pur, Sy. 37(P R.R. District, (Appeals)-2, Si ?,Opp gnature . Botanical 1 2 3. Oppor;ite LB Stadium, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad, Telangana - 500004. Commissioner of lncome Tax (Appeals)-10, 6th Floor, Aayakar Bhawan, 500084. n, 500004. ue, Ministry of Opposite LB Stadium, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad, Telangana - 4. Natiorral Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi Department of Reven Finan,;e, North Block, New Delhi-1 10001. loPUCl INCOM TAX [OPUC] 5. Principal Commissioner of lncome Tax-2, Signature Towers, Kondapur, Hydembad, Telangana - 500084. One CC to SRI T.PRADYOTH, Advocate One CC to Ms. J.SUNITHA, SR. SC FOR Two 0D Copies 6. 7. 8. PSK. TKS fr:'a, --# lFloor, j i

/t HIGH COURT DATED:2610312026 ORDER WP.No.8870 of 2026 !\ -f ir:: S tii Ci LJ 1'I. t:,, * 0 B APft ?rJ26 j;1.',Tr:hl . ..r-.,,ji'rr-!..Jdrri:.-trii-;L ,r .-i: ,. j '-' --i.....,.'<j1i-:., -;..!- DISPOS;ING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOIJT COSTS -JKs +l+lu : .ji::r ....'...,.j;1. ,: : -..1;:.-r . . ii+*i,dr#diz*E#5H*ajsEfiI#:r.1, ;i:.:.. i1

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →