PRABHA GUPTA vs. UNION OF INDIA AND 3 OTHERS

PDF · subscribers
WTAX/4827/2025HC AllahabadUPHC01502485202522 September 20252 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed respondent No.2, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi, to decide the petitioner's stay application within a period of six weeks from the date of the order. The Court also directed that no coercive steps be taken against the petitioner in pursuance of the demand notice dated July 8, 2025, for Assessment Year 2013-14, until an order is passed on the stay application by respondent No.2. The Court viewed this as a way to bring the matter to a quietus. The operative direction is to decide the stay application and to refrain from coercive action until such decision. No issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking directions for the disposal of their appeal and stay application related to Assessment Year 2013-14. The petitioner had filed an appeal in 2022 and a stay application before the Assessing Officer (respondent No.3). The authorities had not decided these applications and were pursuing recovery of demands. The petitioner sought a mandamus directing respondent No.2 (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi) to decide the appeal or stay application, and respondent No.3 to decide the stay application. Additionally, the petitioner sought a direction to respondent No.3 not to take coercive action pursuant to a demand notice dated July 8, 2025.

What were the issues?

1. Whether a writ of mandamus should be issued directing respondent No.2 (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi) to decide the petitioner's appeal (NFAC/2012-13/10147178) and stay application for Assessment Year 2013-14. The petitioner argued that their applications have not been decided, and recovery is being pursued without such decision. 2. Whether a writ of mandamus should be issued directing respondent No.3 (Assessing Officer) to decide the petitioner's stay application dated July 8, 2023, for Assessment Year 2013-14. The petitioner contended that the stay application remains undecided. 3. Whether a writ of mandamus should be issued directing respondent No.3 not to take coercive action against the petitioner concerning the demand notice dated July 8, 2025, for Assessment Year 2013-14. The petitioner sought to prevent recovery actions before the decision on their stay application. The revenue did not record any specific arguments in the judgment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 246A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT TAX No. - 4827 of 2025 Court No. - 3 HON'BLE SHEKHAR B. SARAF, J. HON'BLE PRAVEEN KUMAR GIRI, J. 1. Heard counsel appearing on behalf of the parties. 2. This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India wherein the writ petitioner has made the following prayers:- "i. issue writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing respondent no.2 to decide the Appeal number NFAC/2012-13/10147178 (Annexure No.8) of petitioner for Assessment Year 2013-14 or Stay Application dated 27.04.2022 (Annexure No.9). ii. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing respondent no.3 to decide the Stay Application (Annexure No.11) of petitioner dated 08.07.2023 for Assessment Year 2013-14. iii. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing respondent no.3 not to take any covercive action against petitioner in pursuance to demand notice dated 08.07.2025 for assessment year 2013-14 (Annexure No.1)." 3. After perusal of the documents, it is clear that the petitioner has filed an appeal under Section 246A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in the year 2022. Furthermore, stay application has been filed before the Assessing Officer being respondent No.3 also. None of the applications has been decided by the authorities and without deciding the same, they are pressing for the recovery of the demands. 4. We are of the view that this matter can be brought to a quietus by directing respondent No.2 being the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi to decide the stay application of the petitioner within a period of six weeks from date. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Puneet Agarwal Counsel for Respondent(s) : A.S.G.I., Ankur Agarwal, Dhananjay Awasthi, Krishna Ji Shukla Prabha Gupta .....Petitioner(s) Union Of India And 3 Others .....Respondent(s)

5.

This order should be communicated by the counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent to the authority concerned immediately. 6. Authorities are directed not to take any coercive steps against the petitioner in pursuance of demand notice dated July 8, 2025 for the Assessment Year 2013-14 till the order in the stay application is passed by respondent No.2. 7. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. September 23, 2025 DKS WTAX No. 4827 of 2025 2 (Praveen Kumar Giri,J.) (Shekhar B. Saraf,J.) Digitally signed by :- DEEPAK KUMAR SRIVASTWA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →