The West Bengal State Co-Operative Agricultural & Rural Development Bank Ltd., Kolkata V. ACIT, Circle- 32, Kolkata, Kolkata

ITA 1068/KOL/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 136 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2449 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-07-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 26-08-2014
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 19-06-2009
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: HOMI RAJBANSH
• Assessee Lawyers: S JHAJHARIA

Judgement Text

, , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH : KOLKATA () . . , , ! .'#. , $% [BEFORE SRI B. R. MITTAL, JM & SRI C. D. RAO , AM] !& !& !& !& / ITA NO.1068 /KOL/2009 '( )* '( )* '( )* '( )*/ // / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 M/S. THE WEST BENGAL STATE CO-OPERATIVE -VS- ASSIST ANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, AGRICULTURAL & RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD. CIR CLE-32, KOLKATA. (PA NO. AAAJT 6468 K) (,- / APPELLANT ) (./,-/ RESPONDENT ) & !& !& !& !& / ITA NO.1108 /KOL/2009 '( )* '( )* '( )* '( )*/ // / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, -VS- M/S. THE WEST BENGAL STATE CO-OPERATIVE CIRCLE-32, KOLKATA. AGRICULTIRA; & RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD. (,- / APPELLANT ) (./,-/ RESPONDENT ) FOR THE ASSESSEE : : 0 /SRI S. JHAJHARIA FOR THE DEPARTMENT 0 /SRI HOMI RAJBANSH $1 / ORDER PER B. R. MITTAL, ( . . . . . . . . ) )) ), , , , ) : THESE CROSS APPEALS HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A), KOLKATA DATED 08.05.2009 FOR ASSESSM ENT YEAR 2006-07. 2. THE ASSESSEE IS A STATE GOVERNMENT ENTERPRISES. THE HONBLE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF OIL AND NATURAL GAS CORPORATION LTD V. CITY AND INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, MAHARASTRA AND OTHERS (2007) 7 SCC 39, HELD THAT EV EN DISPUTES BETWEEN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT AND STATE GOVERNMENT ENTITIES HAD TO BE FIRST CLEARED BY SPECIAL FORMED COMMITTEE BEFORE BEING REFERRED TO COURT FOR ADJUDI CATION. HONBLE APEX COURT HAS OBSERVED THAT THE EXISTENCE OF SUCH A MECHANISM FOR RESOLUTION OF DISPUTES BETWEEN VARIOUS LIMBS OF THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA AND DIRECT ED THAT A COMMITTEE BE FORMED TO SORT OUT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE CENTRAL GOVERNM ENT AND STATE GOVERNMENT ENTITIES. IT WAS ALSO SUGGESTED BY THEIR LORDSHIPS THAT SUCH COMMITTEE WILL CONSISTS OF UNION CABINET SECRETARY, STATE GOVERNMENT CHIEF SECRETARY , SECRETARIES OF THE DEPARTMENTS CONCERNED IN THE UNION AND STATE GOVERNMENT CONCERN ED AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF THE UNDERTAKING CONCERNED. THEIR LORDSHIPS DIREC TED THAT THE COMMITTEE SHALL BE 2 CONSTITUTED FORTHWITH AND SHALL TAKE A DECISION WIT HIN FOUR MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF THIS JUDGMENT. 3. IN THE LIGHT OF THE ABOVE DECISION, WE PUT THE PROPOSITION TO THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PARTIES AS TO WHY THESE APPEALS SHOULD NOT B E DISMISSED IN LIMINE IN THE ABSENCE OF CLEARANCE FROM COD. LD. REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH THE PARTIES COULD NOT FURNISH ANY EVIDENCE OF FILING ANY APPLICATION SEEKING APPROVAL FROM COD. IT IS RELEVANT TO STATE THAT THEIR LORDSHIPS OF THE APEX COURT, IN THE CASE OF CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS OF ANDHRA PRADESH GOVERNMENT V. COLLECTOR & OTHERS [(2 003) 3 SCC 472] OBSERVED THAT DISPUTES BETWEEN GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS CANNOT BE C ONTESTED IN COURT. STATE/UNION OF INDIA MUST EVOLVE A MECHANISM FOR RESOLVING INTE R-DEPARTMENTAL CONTROVERSIES. THEIR LORDSHIPS NOTED THAT IT IS THE OBLIGATION OF EVERY COURT OR TRIBUNAL WHERE SUCH DISPUTE IS RAISED, TO DEMAND A CLEARANCE OF THE COMMITTEE IN C ASE IT HAS NOT BEEN SO PLEADED. IN THE ABSENCE OF SUCH A CLEARANCE, THE PROCEEDINGS WILL N OT BE PROCEEDED WITH. IN THE BACK DROP OF THE ABOVE, AND HAVING NOTED THAT THE CLEARA NCE OF THE COMMITTEE WAS NOT OBTAINED, HONBLE MADRAS HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF TAMILNADU WAREHOUSING CORPORATION V. DCIT (2005) 15 DTR (MAD) 67, CONCLUD ED THAT HENCE, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED AS NOT MAINTAINABLE IN THE ABSENCE OF CLE ARANCE, HOWEVER, BY GIVING LIBERTY TO THE APPELLANT TO MOVE THIS COURT AFTER OBTAINING CL EARANCE FROM THE COD. 4. SIMILAR ISSUE HAS BEEN CONSIDERED RECENTLY BY IT AT, PUNE BENCH IN THE CASE OF MAHARASHTRA STATE WAREHOUSING V. DCIT [ 22 DTR 531] , WHEREIN IT WAS OBSERVED THAT THE REQUIREMENT OF THE COD COMES INTO PLAY BECAUSE OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURTS DIRECTION FOR SEEKING COD CLEARANCE IN RESPECT OF D ISPUTE INVOLVING STATE GOVERNMENT AND STATE GOVERNMENT BODIES. SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT OBTAINED THE CLEARANCE OF THE COD AND IN THE ABSENCE OF SUCH A CLEARANCE, THE APP EALS ARE NOT MAINTAINABLE AND WE DISMISS BOTH THE APPEALS WITH A LIBERTY TO REVIVE THE APPEALS UPON OBTAINING CLEARANCE OF THE COD OR WITH THE EVIDENCE THAT SUCH A COMMITT EE DOES NOT EXISTS OR IS IN THE PROCESS. 5. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS STAND DISMISSED . 6. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- . .. .'# '#'# '#. .. . , , , , $% $% $% $% . . . . . . . . (C. D. RAO) (B. R. MITTAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER #% #% #% #%) )) ) DATED : 28TH JULY, 2010 3 23 '45 6 JD.(SR.P.S.) $1 7 .8 9$8):- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. ,- /APPELLANT - M/S. WEST BENGAL STATE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL & RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD., C/O SALARPURIA JAJODIA & CO., 7, C,R, AVENUE, KOLKATA-72. 2 ./,- / ACIT, CIRCLE-32, KOLKATA. 3. 1'/ THE CIT KOLKATA 4. 1' ()/ THE CIT(A), KOLKATA 5. AB .' / DR, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA /8 ./ TRUE COPY , $1'C/ BY ORDER , D !5 / DEPUTY REGISTRAR