Vijay Kumar Gupta V. Commissioner Of Income Tax AND ANOTHER

WPMS/2207/2017

AI Insights

The case involves multiple writ petitions filed by Vijay Kumar Gupta and others against the Commissioner of Income Tax and others, concerning the delay in the decision of their appeals related to an Assessment Order passed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act against Kailashanand Mission Trust, Rishikesh. The petitions were clubbed together due to common questions of fact and law. The primary relief sought was a mandamus to compel the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to decide the pending appeals within a stipulated time. The respondents introduced the 'Faceless Appeal Scheme, 2020', which aimed to streamline the appeal process but faced initial operational challenges. The court acknowledged these challenges and directed the respondent to resolve them and expedite the decision-making process for the pending appeals.

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 670913 (HC-UTTARAKHAND)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 12-04-2021
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: HARI MOHAN BHATIA
• Assessee Lawyers: S K POSTI; RAVI BISHT
• Keywords: Assessment Order; Faceless Appeal Scheme, 2020; Income Tax; Mandamus
• Section: 143(3); 246

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL ON THE 12TH DAY OF APRIL, 2021 BEFORE: HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI Writ Petition (M/S) No. 2200 of 2017 BETWEEN: Vijay Kumar Gupta ...Petitioner AND: Commissioner of Income Tax & others …Respondents With Writ Petition (M/S) No. 2201 of 2017 Writ Petition (M/S) No. 2202 of 2017 Writ Petition (M/S) No. 2203 of 2017 Writ Petition (M/S) No. 2204 of 2017 Writ Petition (M/S) No. 2205 of 2017 Writ Petition (M/S) No. 2206 of 2017 Writ Petition (M/S) No. 2207 of 2017 Writ Petition (M/S) No. 2210 of 2017 Writ Petition (M/S) No. 2212 of 2017 Writ Petition (M/S) No. 2213 of 2017 Writ Petition (M/S) No. 2214 of 2017 Writ Petition (M/S) No. 2215 of 2017 Mr. S.K. Posti, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Ravi Bisht, learned counsel for the petitioners Mr. Hari Mohan Bhatia, learned counsel for the respondents. JUDGMENT 1. Since common questions of fact and law are involved in these petitions, therefore, these petitions are clubbed together and are being heard & decided together. For the sake of convenience, facts of WPMS No. 2200 of 2017 are being taken into consideration. 2 2. An Assessment Order was passed against Kailashanand Mission Trust, Rishikesh under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act. Petitioner has filed an appeal against the said Assessment Order under Section 246 of the Income Tax Act before the Commissioner, Income Tax, Dehradun (respondent no. 1 herein) in the year 2014. 3. In the said appeal, prayer made was to set aside the Assessment Order and remit the matter back to Assessing Officer for fresh re-assessment, in accordance with law. Since the said appeal is not being decided so far, therefore, petitioner has approached this Court seeking following relief:- (i) Issue a suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondent no. 1, Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Muzzafernagar, Camp Office at Dehradun, to decide the appeals no. 247/CIT(A)/DDN/2014-15 For Assessment Year 2013-14 of petitioner within stipulated time as fixed by this Hon’ble Court. 4. Mr. Hari Mohan Bhatia, learned counsel for the respondents has produced one notification dated 25.09.2020 issued by Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Government of India. The said notification is taken on record. Perusal of the said notification reveals that the Central Government had introduced a Scheme known as “Faceless Appeal Scheme, 2020”. 5. Based on the said notification, Mr. Hari Mohan Bhatia, learned counsel for the respondents 3 submits that all pending appeals, filed under Section 246 of Income Tax Act, have been uploaded in the online system, however, since the Scheme was introduced only in the last week of September, 2020 and there are certain teething problems, which need to be resolved before the Faceless Appeal Centres, set-up under para 4 of the Scheme, starts disposal of the appeal. He further submits that the appeal filed by the petitioner has also been uploaded for decision for such Faceless Appeal Centres. He assures the Court that as soon as the Faceless Appeal Centres start normal functioning, the appeal filed by the petitioner would be decided at the earliest. 6. In such view of the matter, writ petitions are disposed of with a direction to respondent no. 3 to decide the appeal(s) filed by the petitioner, after it starts normal functioning, as early as possible, preferably within a period of one year. It goes without saying that respondent no. 3 shall hear all the stakeholders before taking any decision. (MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI, J.) Aswal "