ACIT, New Delhi V. M/s. Punjab & Sind Bank, New Delhi

ITA 4099/DEL/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 136 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4114 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-05-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Next Hearing Date: 03-05-2010
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 09-10-2009
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: M K GUATAM

Judgement Text

ITA NO. 4099/DEL/09 A.Y. 2001-02 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH F DELHI) BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 4099(DEL)2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2001-02 ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF I.TAX, M/S PUNJAB & SIND BANK, CIRCLE-14(1), ROOM NO. 415, V. HO ACCOUNTS & AUDIT DEPTT., C.R. BLDG., NEW DELHI 21, RAJENDRA PLACE, NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI M.K. GUATAM, C.I.T.(DR), RESPONDENT BY : NONE ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THE APPELLANT IN THE PRESENT APPEAL IS DEPARTMENT. RESPONDENT IN THE PRESENT CASE IS PUBLIC SECTOR UNDERTAKING/ GOVT. OF INDIA U NDERTAKING. ACCORDING TO THE DECISION OF HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF OI L & NATURAL GAS COMMISSION & ANOTHER V. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, 104 CT R SC 31 IT IS OBLIGATORY ON EVERY COURT AND EVERY TRIBUNAL WHERE DISPUTE BETWEE N PUBLIC SECTOR UNDERTAKING AND DEPARTMENT IS RAISED TO DEMAND A CLEARANCE FROM COMMITTEE IN CASE IT HAS NOT BEEN SO PLEADED AND IN THE ABSENCE OF CLEARANCE, TH E 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 F ROM THE COMMITTEE IN CASE ITA NO. 4099/DEL/09 A.Y. 2001-02 2 IT HAS NOT BEEN SO PLEADED AND IN THE ABSENCE OF TH E CLEARANCE, THE PROCEEDINGS WOULD NOT BE PROCEEDED WITH. 2. THE STAND WAS REITERATED BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF MAHANAGAR TELEPHONE NIGAM LTD. V. CHAIRMAN, CBDT, [ 2004] 267 ITR 647(SC) AS PER THE FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS:- IN THIS CASE, THIS IS ABSOLUTELY WHAT HAS HAPPENED . THE APPELLANTS WANTED TO APPROACH THE COURT ONLY AGAINST A SHOW CAUSE NOT ICE. IT IS SETTLED LAW THAT AGAINST A SHOW CAUSE NOTICE LITIGATION SHOULD NOT B E ENCOURAGED. THE DECISION OF THE HIGH POWERED COMMITTEE, SET OUT HER EINABOVE, MERELY EMPHASIZES THE WELL-SETTLED POSITION. IT IS AN EMI NENTLY FAIR AND CORRECT DECISION. THE PURPOSE OF THE DECISION WAS TO PREV ENT FRIVOLOUS LITIGATION. NO RIGHT OF THE APPELLANTS IS BEING AFFECTED. IT H AS BEEN CLARIFIED THAT THE APPELLANTS COULD MOVE A COURT OF LAW AGAINST AN APP EALABLE ORDER. BY NOT MAINTAINING DISCIPLINE AND ABIDING BY THE DECISION, THE APPELLANTS HAVE WASTED PUBLIC MONEY AND TIME OF THE COURTS. THE C LARIFICATORY ORDER, RELIED UPON BY MR. ANDHYARUJINA, CLARIFIES IN PARA 5 AS TO WHAT IS TO HAPPEN IF CLEARANCE IS NOT GIVEN BY THE COMMITTEE. IT IS SET OUT THAT, IN THE ABSENCE OF THE CLEARANCE, THE PROCEEDINGS MUST NOT BE PROCEEDE D WITH. THIS POSITION IS FURTHER CLARIFIED IN CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS CASE WHERE AGAIN THIS COURT HAS HELD THAT THE DECISION TAKEN BY SUCH A CO MMITTEE IS BINDING ON ALL DEPARTMENTS CONCERNED AND IT IS THE STAND OF THE GO VERNMENT. IN VIEW OF THIS SETTLED LAW, WHICH IS BINDING ON US , WE HOLD THAT, AS CLEARANCE HAS NOT BEEN GIVEN TO THE APPELLANTS, THE SE PROCEEDINGS CANNOT ITA NO. 4099/DEL/09 A.Y. 2001-02 3 BE PROCEEDED WITH. THE HIGH COURT WAS WRONG IN DE ALING WITH THE MERITS OF THE MATTER. WE, THEREFORE, DO NOT EXAMINE WHET HER THE HIGH COURT WAS RIGHT ON MERITS. THE APPEAL ACCORDINGLY STANDS DI SPOSED OF WITH NO ORDER AS TO COSTS. 3. NO SUCH APPROVAL FROM COD HAS BEEN FURNISHED BY THE DEPARTMENT, THEREFORE, IN THE ABSENCE OF CLEARANCE FROM COD THE APPEAL FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT CANNOT BE PROCEEDED WITH. AS SUCH THIS APPEAL IS DISMISSED FOR WANT OF CLEARANCE FROM COD. WE MAY OBSERVE THAT IF LAT ER ON IN CASE THE DEPARTMENT IS ABLE TO OBTAIN CLEARANCE FROM COD IT MAY APPROAC H THE TRIBUNAL FOR REVIVAL OF THIS APPEAL. WITH THESE OBSERVATIONS THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 3 RD MAY, 2010 UPON CONCLUSION OF HEARING. SD/- SD/- (RAJPAL YADAV) (SHAMIM YAHYA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 03.5.2010 *SRB* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. D R TRUE COPY BY ORDER DEPUTY REGISTRAR