DCIT, CHENNAI V. M/s. Indian Overseas Bank, CHENNAI

MA 161/CHNY/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6816 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 23-09-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 24-08-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH : CHENNAI [BEFORE SHRI HARI OM MARATHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER] M.P.NOS.161, 162 & 163/MDS/2011 [IN I .T.A NOS. 391/MDS/09, 1566/MDS/08 & 393/MDS/ 09 ] ASSESSMENT YEARS : 1989-90, 2004-05 & 2005-06 THE DY. CIT LARGE TAXPAYER UNIT CHENNAI VS INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK 763, MOUNT ROAD CHENNAI 600 002 [PAN AAACI 1223J] (PETITIONER) (RESPONDENT) PETITIONER BY : SHRI SANJAY DESHMUKH, DR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI C.NARESH, CA DATE OF HEARING : 23-09-2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 23-09-2011 O R D E R PER HARI OM MARATHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THESE MISCELLANEOUS PETITIONS HAVE B EEN FILED BY THE REVENUE FOR RECALLING OF THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS DATE D 13.8.2009 AND 22.1.2209, VIDE WHICH THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE W ERE DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PERMISSION OF THE COMMITTEE ON DISPUTES(COD ). THE REVENUE WAS GIVEN LIBERTY TO GET THE ORDERS RECALLED ONCE I T OBTAINS THE REQUISITE COD PERMISSION. 2. IT HAS BEEN PLEADED THAT IN VIEW OF THE DECISIO N OF HON'BLE SUPREME COURT RENDERED RECENTLY IN THE CASE OF ELEC TRONICS CORPORATION M.P 161,162&163/2011 :- 2 -: OF INDIA LTD VS UNION OF INDIA, 2011-TIOL-18-SC-CX- CB, JUDGMENT DATED 17.2.2011, IN CIVIL APPEAL NOS.1883 OF 2011 SLP(C) NO.2538 OF 2009, IT HAS BEEN CATEGORICALLY H ELD THAT FOR PURSUING LITIGATION BETWEEN PSUS AND THE GOVERNMENT , THERE IS NO LONGER A NEED TO OBTAIN PERMISSION OF COD. THE REA SON FOR ARRIVING AT THE ABOVE CONCLUSION HAS BEEN STATED TO BE THAT ALT HOUGH THE OBJECT IN GETTING COD PERMISSION IS LAUDATORY BUT THE MECHANI SM INVOLVED IN THE PROCESS LEADS TO DELAYS IN LITIGATION AND AS SUCH, THE MECHANISM HAS OUTLIVED ITS UTILITY. IT HAS BEEN OBSERVED B Y THEIR LORDSHIPS THAT IN THE CHANGED SCENARIO THE EXISTING DIRECTIONS TO OBT AIN COD PERMISSION HAS OUTLIVED SO IT IS BEING RECALLED AND HEREINAFTE R, THERE IS NO NEED FOR SUCH PERMISSION OF COD TO PURSUE LITIGATION BETWEEN PSUS AND GOVERNMENT. SINCE THE JUDGMENT OF APEX COURT BECOM ES THE LAW OF THE LAND IN VIEW OF ARTICLE 141 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, IT WOULD BE DEEMED THAT ON THE DATE OF ORDERS PASSED ON 13.8.2 009 AND 22.1.2009 BY THIS BENCH THERE WAS NO NEED FOR PERMI SSION OF THE COD TO PURSUE THE DISPUTE BY THE PETITIONER AGAINST THE PSU. SINCE A MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD HAS CREPT INTO THE ORD ERS OF THE TRIBUNAL, WE RECALL THE SAME AND DIRECT THE REGISTRY TO FIX T HE APPEALS FOR HEARING IN DUE COURSE. 3. IT IS TO BE NOTED THAT VIDE ORDER DATED 13.8.20 10 IN M.P.NO. 100/MDS/2010 THE TRIBUNAL HAS RECALLED ITS ORDER I N I.T.A.NO. M.P 161,162&163/2011 :- 3 -: 1566/MDS/ 2008 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05, IN RESP ECT OF ONLY ONE ISSUE AS PER THE COD APPROVAL OBTAINED BY THE REV ENUE. IN VIEW OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT DECISION (SUPRA), WE RECA LL THE TRIBUNAL ORDER QUA ON ALL THE THREE ISSUES INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE M.P.NOS.161 AND 162/MDS/2011 S TAND ALLOWED. 5. AS REGARDS I.T.A.NO. 393/MDS/2009 VIDE ORDER DATED 4.6.2010 IN M.P.NO.83/MDS/2010, THE TRIBUNAL HAS RECALLED I TS ORDER DATED 13.8.2009 IN VIEW OF THE COD APPROVAL OBTAINED BY T HE REVENUE, BUT THE REVENUE HAS INADVERTENTLY AGAIN FILED THE PRESE NT M.P. BEARING NO.163/MDS/2011. WE, THEREFORE, DISMISS THE SAME. 6. TO SUMMARIZE THE RESULT, M.P.NOS.161 & 162/MDS/201 1 STAND ALLOWED WHEREAS M.P.NO.163/MDS/2011 STANDS DISMISSE D. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 23 .9.2011 SD/- SD/- (N.S.SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( HARI OM MARATHA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 23 RD SEPTEMBER, 2011 RD COPY TO: PETITIONER/RESPONDENT/CIT(A)/CIT/DR