17-Month Delay in Deciding Income Tax Appeal Unacceptable: Calcutta HC Slams CIT(A), Directs Disposal of Appeal Within 6 Weeks [Read Order]
The Court held that the failure of the CIT(A) to pass a speaking order for over 17 months despite explicit directions from the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) amounted to non-compliance of a binding judicial order, violating an assessee's right to speedy justice and Article 14 of the Constitution.
![17-Month Delay in Deciding Income Tax Appeal Unacceptable: Calcutta HC Slams CIT(A), Directs Disposal of Appeal Within 6 Weeks [Read Order] 17-Month Delay in Deciding Income Tax Appeal Unacceptable: Calcutta HC Slams CIT(A), Directs Disposal of Appeal Within 6 Weeks [Read Order]](https://images.taxscan.in/h-upload/2026/06/22/2141007-calcutta-hc-slams-17-month-appeal-delay-taxscan.webp)
The Calcutta High Court has strongly reprimanded the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] for administrative inaction and directed the authority to dispose of a taxpayer's appeal for Assessment Year 2015-16 within six weeks. It held that the failure of the CIT(A) to pass a speaking order for over 17 months despite explicit directions from the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) amounted to non-compliance of a binding judicial order, violating an assessee's right to speedy justice and Article 14 of the Constitution.
The petitioner, Janhavi Promoters Private Limited, approached the High Court through a writ petition challenging the inaction of the income tax authorities. The grievance stemmed from a previous ITAT order dated January 21, 2025, which had specifically restored the assessee’s appeal to the file of the CIT(A) with a clear direction to pass a "speaking order." Furthermore, the ITAT had allowed the assessee's appeal for "statistical purposes" due to the department's failure to provide any information regarding the status of the pending order.
Also Read:Sanction for Reopening u/s 151(i) Instead of S. 151(ii) of Income Tax Act Is Invalid: Bombay HC Quashes Reassessment Notices [Read Order]
Despite this explicit tribunal directive and a subsequent application filed by the petitioner on April 30, 2025, seeking early disposal of the transferred appeal, the CIT(A) failed to pass the required order for over 17 months.
Justice Smita Das De noted that the respondents did not dispute the facts and had no objection to the early disposal plea. Observing that an assessee cannot be left remediless due to administrative lethargy, the Court held that the 17-month delay violated the principles of natural justice and the right to speedy justice guaranteed under Article 14 of the Constitution. The Court deemed this inaction a clear case of non-compliance with a binding judicial order.
Without delving into the merits of the underlying tax dispute, the Court disposed of the writ petition by issuing a strict, time-bound mandate. The CIT(A) was directed to peremptorily consider the early disposal application and pass a reasoned order in accordance with the law within six weeks, after providing a hearing opportunity to the petitioner, and communicate the decision within a week thereafter.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates


