ACIT, New Delhi V. PNB Housing Finance Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 4630/DEL/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 136 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3778 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-06-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Next Hearing Date: 02-06-2010
• Assessment Year: 2000-2001
• Appeal Filed On: 08-12-2009
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANUSHA KHURANA

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO. 4630, 4631 /DEL/2009 1/4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI, BENCH F BEFORE SHRI RAPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A K GARODIA, ACCOUTANT MEMBER ITA NO.4630, 4631/DEL/2009 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2000-01& 2005-06 RESPECTIVELY) ACIT, CIRCLE 14(1), VS. P N B HOUSING FINANCE LTD. , NEW DELHI. 9 TH FLOOR, ANTRIKSH BHAWAN, 22 K G MARG, NEW DELHI. (APPELLANTS) (RESPONDENTS) PAN / GIR NO. AAACP3682N APPELLANT BY: SMT. ANUSHA KHURANA SR. DR RESPONDENT BY: NONE ORDER PER A. K. GARODIA, AM: 1. THESE APPEALS HAVE BEEN PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A), NEW DELHI DATED 16.09.2009 & 01.09.2009 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2000-01 & 2005-0 6. 2. THE APPELLANT IN THE PRESENT APPEALS IS DEPARTME NT. RESPONDENT IN THE PRESENT CASE IS PUBLIC SECTOR UNDERTAKING/ GOVT. OF INDIA UNDERTAKING. ACCORDING TO THE DECISION OF HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF OI L & NATURAL GAS COMMISSION & ANOTHER V. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, 104 CTR SC 31, IT IS OBLIGATORY ON EVERY COURT AND EVERY TRIBUNAL WHERE DISPUTE BETWEEN PUBL IC SECTOR UNDERTAKING AND DEPARTMENT IS RAISED, TO DEM AND A I.T.A. NO. 4630, 4631 /DEL/2009 2/4 CLEARANCE FROM COMMITTEE IN CASE IT HAS NOT BEEN SO PLACED ON SRECORD AND IN THE ABSENCE OF CLEARANCE, THE PRO CEEDINGS 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 T O DEMAND A CLEARANCE FROM THE COMMITTEE IN CASE IT HA S NOT BEEN SO PLEADED AND IN THE ABSENCE OF THE CLEARANCE , THE PROCEEDINGS WOULD NOT BE PROCEEDED WITH. 3. 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 AGAINS T A SHOW CAUSE NOTICE. IT IS SETTLED LAW THAT AGAINST A SHOW CAUSE NOTICE LITIGATION SHOULD NOT BE ENCOURAGED. THE DECISION OF THE HIGH POWERED COMMITTEE, SET OUT HEREINABOVE, MERELY EMPHASIZES THE WELL-SETTLED POS ITION. IT IS AN EMINENTLY FAIR AND CORRECT DECISION. THE PURPOSE OF THE DECISION WAS TO PREVENT FRIVOLOUS LITIGATION . NO RIGHT OF THE APPELLANTS IS BEING AFFECTED. IT HAS BEEN CLARIFIED THAT THE APPELLANTS COULD MOVE A COURT OF LAW AGAINST AN APPEALABLE ORDER. BY NOT MAINTAINING DISCIPLINE AND ABIDING BY THE DECISION, THE APPELLA NTS HAVE WASTED PUBLIC MONEY AND TIME OF THE COURTS. THE CLARIFICATORY ORDER, RELIED UPON BY MR. ANDHYARUJIN A, CLARIFIES IN PARA 5 AS TO WHAT IS TO HAPPEN IF CLEA RANCE 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 CONSERV ATOR OF FORESTS CASE WHERE AGAIN THIS COURT HAS HELD THAT THE I.T.A. NO. 4630, 4631 /DEL/2009 3/4 DECISION TAKEN BY SUCH A COMMITTEE IS BINDING ON AL L DEPARTMENTS CONCERNED AND IT IS THE STAND OF THE GOVERNMENT. IN VIEW OF THIS SETTLED LAW, WHICH IS BINDING ON US , WE HOLD THAT, AS CLEARANCE HAS NOT BEEN GIVEN TO THE APPELL ANTS, THESE PROCEEDINGS CANNOT BE PROCEEDED WITH. THE H IGH COURT WAS WRONG IN DEALING WITH THE MERITS OF THE M ATTER. WE, THEREFORE, DO NOT EXAMINE WHETHER THE HIGH COUR T WAS RIGHT ON MERITS. THE APPEAL ACCORDINGLY STANDS DI SPOSED OF WITH NO ORDER AS TO COSTS. 4. NO SUCH APPROVAL FROM COD HAS BEEN FURNISHED BY THE DEPARTMENT, THEREFORE, IN THE ABSENCE OF CLEARANCE FROM COD THE APPEALS FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT CANNOT BE PROCEEDED WITH. AS SUCH THESE APPEALS ARE DISMISS ED FOR WANT OF CLEARANCE FROM COD. WE MAY OBSERVE THAT LA TER ON, IN CASE THE DEPARTMENT IS ABLE TO OBTAIN CLEARA NCE FROM COD, THE DEPARTMENT IS AT LIBERTY TO APPROACH THE T RIBUNAL FOR REVIVAL OF THESE APPEALS AS PER LAW. WITH THESE OBSERVATIONS, THE APPEALS ARE DISMISSED. 5. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE S TANDS DISMISSED. 6. THIS DECISION WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT O N 02 ND JUNE 2010. SD./- SD./- (RAJPAL YADAV) (A K GARODIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED:02 ND JUNE, 2010 SP. I.T.A. NO. 4630, 4631 /DEL/2009 4/4 COPY FORWARDED TO 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT TRUE COPY: BY ORDER 4. CIT(A) 5. DR DY. REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI