TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Legal Challenge Reveals Income Tax Appeal Bottlenecks, Highlights Administrative Inefficiency in Resolving Pending Tax Disputes</h1> <h3>Sanjay Kumar Agarwal Versus Central Board Of Direct Taxes & Ors.</h3> HC addressed a writ petition challenging NFAC's delay in disposing of an income tax appeal beyond statutory timelines. While acknowledging significant ... Delays in disposal of the appeals by the National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC] - HELD THAT:- This court by an order dated 24.02.2025 had observed that it was cognizant of the large number of statutory appeals which are pending disposal before NFAC and had also expressed concern regarding the delay in disposal of the same. The court further observed that NFAC would endeavour to implement remedial measures in all earnest. Undoubtedly, there are large number of appeals which are pending adjudication before NFAC. It is necessary for the NFAC to take remedial steps for early disposal of the appeals. Nonetheless, we do not consider it apposite to issue any further directions in this regard. The petition is disposed of. The Delhi High Court, through Justices Vibhu Bakhrru and Tejas Karia, addressed a petition seeking a writ of mandamus directing the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) to expeditiously dispose of the appellant's pending income tax appeal for AY 2022-23. The petitioner relied on section 250(6A) of the Income Tax Act, noting the one-year disposal period had expired on 31/03/25, and invoked CBDT Instructions No. 20/2003 and dated 19/06/15 mandating appellate orders be issued within 15 days of the last hearing (which was on 09/10/24). The petitioner emphasized the delay and requested disposal within three weeks.The Court acknowledged the significant backlog of appeals pending before NFAC and noted prior recognition of these delays in a related case (W.P.(C) No.356/2025). While expressing concern, the Court declined to issue further directions, stating it was 'necessary for the NFAC to take remedial steps for early disposal' but refrained from mandating specific timelines. The petition was disposed of with the hope that NFAC will resolve the pendency expeditiously.Key holding: The Court recognized the delay and backlog but did not grant a mandamus for disposal within a fixed timeframe, emphasizing NFAC's responsibility to implement remedial measures without judicial imposition of deadlines.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
