Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiyya V. Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals

CWP/6422/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiyya, the petitioner, who filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals to expedite the decision on their appeal. The appeal was initially filed on the e-filing portal under Form No. 35 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Despite multiple submissions and responses to notices under Section 250 of the Act, requiring ground-wise written submissions and supporting documentary evidence, the appeal remained undecided for an extended period. The petitioner argued that the repeated notices and requests for the same documents caused unnecessary delays. The respondent did not oppose the request for a time-bound decision on the appeal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 676777 (HC-MISC)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 10-03-2025
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Applicant
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: URVASHI DUGGA
• Assessee Lawyers: RADHIKA SURI; PARNIKA SINGLA
• Keywords: E-filing; Form No. 35; Income Tax Appeals; Mandamus; Ground-wise Written Submissions; Supporting Documentary Evidence
• Section: 250

Judgement Text

"CWP-6422-2025(O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiyya Commissioner of CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE Present: Ms. Ms. Ms. Urvashi Dugga, Sr. Penal Counsel, SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J. The petitioner in the present writ petition is asking for issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondent Income Tax Appeal petitioner, preferably within one month. 2. Learned preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals 28.05.2021 on e (hereinafter referred to as, ‘the Act’). She petitioner received written submissions along with suppo response to the same the petitioner filed written submissions further contends that again on 12.07.2024, the same notice under Section 250 of the Act was sent requiring the petitioner to furnish grou submissions along with supporting documentary evidence(s). The petitioner again 2025(O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -.- CWP Decided on : Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiyya VERSUS Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA Ms. Radhika Suri, Sr. Advocate, with Ms. Parnika Singla, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Urvashi Dugga, Sr. Penal Counsel, -.- SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J. The petitioner in the present writ petition is asking for issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondent Income Tax Appeals [CIT(A)] to expeditiously decide the appeal filed by the petitioner, preferably within one month. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner contends that preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals on e-filing portal under Form No.35 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as, ‘the Act’). She further contends that on 13.02.2024, the received notice under Section 250 of the Act written submissions along with supporting documentary evidence(s) and in response to the same the petitioner filed written submissions further contends that again on 12.07.2024, the same notice under Section 250 of the Act was sent requiring the petitioner to furnish grou along with supporting documentary evidence(s). The petitioner again -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-6422-2025(O&M) Decided on :- 10.03.2025 ....Petitioner ....Respondents ARUN PALLI SUDEEPTI SHARMA Radhika Suri, Sr. Advocate, with Parnika Singla, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Urvashi Dugga, Sr. Penal Counsel, for the respondent. The petitioner in the present writ petition is asking for issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondent - Commissioner of to expeditiously decide the appeal filed by the counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals g portal under Form No.35 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 further contends that on 13.02.2024, the notice under Section 250 of the Act to furnish ground-wise rting documentary evidence(s) and in response to the same the petitioner filed written submissions on 17.05.2024. She further contends that again on 12.07.2024, the same notice under Section 250 of the Act was sent requiring the petitioner to furnish ground-wise written along with supporting documentary evidence(s). The petitioner again The petitioner in the present writ petition is asking for issuance of a Commissioner of to expeditiously decide the appeal filed by the the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals on g portal under Form No.35 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 further contends that on 13.02.2024, the wise rting documentary evidence(s) and in . She further contends that again on 12.07.2024, the same notice under Section 250 of wise written along with supporting documentary evidence(s). The petitioner again TRIPTI SAINI 2025.03.21 10:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-6422-2025(O&M) filed reply to the notice 17.05.2024 filed by him Section 250 of the Act on 26.09.2024 requiring the same documents, to which twice the petitioner had already given reply. The petitioner again replied to the notice dated 26.09.2024 on 11.10.2024. Sh responding to the notices under Section 250 of the Act been decided by the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals. that the directions be issued appeal in a time bound mann 3. Learned counsel for the respondent does not oppose the by learned senior 4. We have heard learned counsel for the record of the case in hand. 5. A perusal of the record shows that the appeal is pending since 28.05.2021 and till date there is no progress in the proceedings. 6. In view of the above, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent appeal filed by the petitioner within a period of six months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 7. Pending application (ARUN PALLI) JUDGE March 10, 2025 tripti Whether speaking/non Whether reportable 2025(O&M) to the notice on 19.07.2024 giving reference to the previous reply dated filed by him. The petitioner again received the same notice Section 250 of the Act on 26.09.2024 requiring the same documents, to which twice the petitioner had already given reply. The petitioner again replied to the notice dated 26.09.2024 on 11.10.2024. She, therefore, the notices under Section 250 of the Act by the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals. that the directions be issued to the respondent- appeal in a time bound manner. earned counsel for the respondent does not oppose the senior counsel for the petitioner. We have heard learned counsel for the record of the case in hand. A perusal of the record shows that the appeal is pending since 28.05.2021 and till date there is no progress in the proceedings. In view of the above, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent – Commissioner of Income appeal filed by the petitioner within a period of six months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (ARUN PALLI) , 2025 Whether speaking/non-speaking : Speaking Whether reportable : Yes -2- on 19.07.2024 giving reference to the previous reply dated . The petitioner again received the same notice under Section 250 of the Act on 26.09.2024 requiring the same documents, to which twice the petitioner had already given reply. The petitioner again replied to the e, therefore, contends that despite the notices under Section 250 of the Act thrice, the appeal has not by the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals. She, therefore, prays -Appellate Authority to decide the earned counsel for the respondent does not oppose the request made We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the whole A perusal of the record shows that the appeal is pending since 28.05.2021 and till date there is no progress in the proceedings. In view of the above, the present writ petition is disposed of with a Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals to decide the appeal filed by the petitioner within a period of six months from the date of receipt , if any, also stand disposed of. (SUDEEPTI SHARMA) JUDGE speaking : Speaking : Yes on 19.07.2024 giving reference to the previous reply dated under Section 250 of the Act on 26.09.2024 requiring the same documents, to which twice the petitioner had already given reply. The petitioner again replied to the that despite has not She, therefore, prays Appellate Authority to decide the request made and perused the whole A perusal of the record shows that the appeal is pending since In view of the above, the present writ petition is disposed of with a Tax Appeals to decide the appeal filed by the petitioner within a period of six months from the date of receipt TRIPTI SAINI 2025.03.21 10:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document "