DCIT (LTU), New Delhi V. M/s Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 114/DEL/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 135 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7075 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-10-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 11-10-2010
• Assessment Year: 1994-1995
• Appeal Filed On: 08-01-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANGEETA GUPTA

Judgement Text

ITA NO. 114/DEL/2010 A.Y. 1994-95 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH E DELHI) BEFORE SHRI A.D. JAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 114/DEL/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 1994-95 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (LTU), M/S MAHA NAGAR TELEPHONE NBCC PLAZA, PUSHP VIHAR, VS. NIGAM LTD., 1 2 TH FLOOR, NEW DELHI 110 017 TOWER-I, JEEVAN BHARTI BUILDING 124, CONNAUGHT PLACE, NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY: SHRI VED JAIN, CA & RANO JAIN, CA DEPARTMENT BY: MS. SA NGEETA GUPTA, C.I.T(D.R.) ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA : AM THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) DATED 14.10. 2009 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 1994-95. 2. AT THE THRESHOLD, IT IS NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSE E IS A PUBLIC SECTOR UNDERTAKING AND NO APPROVAL FROM THE COD HAS BEEN OB TAINED BY THE REVENUE TO PURSUE THE APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. ITA NO. 114/DEL/2010 A.Y. 1994-95 2 3. ACCORDING TO THE DECISION OF HONBLE SUPREME COU RT IN THE CASE OF OIL & NATURAL GAS COMMISSION & ANOTHER V. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, 104 CTR SC 31 IT IS OBLIGATORY ON EVERY COU RT AND EVERY TRIBUNAL WHERE DISPUTE BETWEEN PUBLIC SECTOR UNDERT AKING AND DEPARTMENT IS RAISED TO DEMAND A CLEARANCE FROM COMMI TTEE IN CASE IT HAS NOT BEEN SO PLEADED AND IN THE ABSENCE OF CLEAR ANCE, THE PROCEEDINGS WOULD NOT BE PROCEEDED WITH. IT WILL BE RELEVANT TO REPRODUCE FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS OF THEIR LORDSHIPS FROM THE SAID DECISION:- IT SHALL BE THE OBLIGATION OF EVERY COURT AND EVER Y TRIBUNAL WHERE SUCH A DISPUTE IS RAISED HEREAFTER TO DEMAND A CLEARANCE FROM THE COMMITTEE IN CASE IT HAS NOT BEEN SO PLEADED AND IN THE ABSENCE OF THE CLEARANCE, THE PROCEEDINGS WOULD NOT BE PROCEEDED WITH. 4. NO SUCH APPROVAL FROM COD HAS BEEN FURNISHED BY TH E DEPARTMENT, THEREFORE, IN THE ABSENCE OF CLEARANCE FR OM COD THE APPEAL FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT CANNOT BE PROCEEDED W ITH. AS SUCH THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED FOR WANT OF CLEARANCE FROM COD. WE MAY OBSERVE THAT IF LATER ON IN CASE THE DEPARTMENT IS A BLE TO OBTAIN CLEARANCE FROM COD IT MAY APPROACH THE TRIBUNAL FOR RE VIVAL OF THIS APPEAL. WITH THESE OBSERVATIONS THE REVENUES APPE AL IS DISMISSED. ITA NO. 114/DEL/2010 A.Y. 1994-95 3 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 11/10/2010 UP ON CONCLUSION OF HEARING. SD/- SD/- (A.D. JAIN) (SHAMIM YAHYA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 11.10.2010 SRB COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR TRUE COPY BY ORDER AR/DR, ITAT