MMTC Limited,, New Delhi v. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 2487/DEL/2010 | 2001-2002
Pronouncement Date: 27-07-2010 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 248720114 RSA 2010
Bench Delhi
Appeal Number ITA 2487/DEL/2010
Duration Of Justice 2 month(s) 2 day(s)
Appellant MMTC Limited,, New Delhi
Respondent DCIT, New Delhi
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 27-07-2010
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted E
Tribunal Order Date 27-07-2010
Date Of Final Hearing 02-10-2016
Next Hearing Date 02-10-2016
Assessment Year 2001-2002
Appeal Filed On 25-05-2010
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH E DELHI BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV AND SHRI K.G. BANSAL ITA NOS. 2487 & 2488(DEL)/2010 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2001-02 & 2003-04 MMTC LTD. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME- SCOPE COMPLEX VS. TAX CIRCLE 5(1) NEW DELHI. CORE-1 LODHI ROAD INSTITUTIONAL AREA NEW DELHI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI SURJIT SINGH GENERAL MAN AGER (FINA NCE) RESPONDENT BY : SMT. SANGEETA GUPTA CIT DR ORDER PER BENCH DURING THE COURSE OF PENDENCY OF HEARING OF THESE APPEALS IT WAS FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT OBTAINED THE AP PROVAL OF THE COMMITTEE FORMED FOR RESOLUTION OF DISPUTES BETWEEN THE CENTRAL PUBLIC SECTOR UNDERTAKINGS AND THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA. SUCH AN APPROVAL IS MANDATORY FOR NOT ONLY PROSECUTING THE APPEAL BUT ALSO FOR FILING AN APPEAL AS HELD BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE O F MAHANAGAR TELEPHONE ITA NOS. 2487 & 2488(DEL)/2010 2 NIGAM LTD. VS. CHAIRMAN CBDT [2004] 267 ITR 64 7. IN THIS JUDGMENT AT PAGE 642 THE HONBLE COURT OBSERVED AS UNDER: - UNDOUBTEDLY THE RIGHT TO ENFORCE A RIGHT IN A C OURT OF LAW CANNOT BE EFFACED. HOWEVER IT MUST BE REMEMBE RED THAT COURTS ARE OVER-BURDENED WITH A LARGE NUMBER OF CASES. THE MAJORITY OF SUCH CASES PERTAIN TO GOVERNMENT DEPA RTMENTS AND/OR PUBLIC SECTOR UNDERTAKINGS. AS IS STATED IN CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS CASE [2003] 3 SCC 472 IT WAS NOT CONTEMPLATED BY THE FRAMERS OF THE CONSTITUTION O R THE CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE THAT TWO DEPARTMENTS OF A STATE O R UNION OF INDIA AND/OR A DEPARTMENT OF THE GOVERNMENT AND A PUBLIC SECTOR UNDERTAKING FIGHT A LITIGATION IN A COUR T OF LAW. SUCH A COURSE IS DETRIMENTAL TO PUBLIC INTEREST AS I T ENTAILS AVOIDABLE WASTAGE OF PUBLIC MONEY AND TIME. THER E ARE ALL LIMITS OF THE GOVERNMENT AND MUST ACT IN CO-ORD INATION AND NOT CONFRONTATION. THE MECHANISM SET UP BY THIS COURT IS NOT AS SUGGESTED BY MR. ANDHYARUJINA ONLY TO CONC ILIATE BETWEEN GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS. IT IS ALSO SET UP FOR PURPOSES OF ENSURING THAT FRIVOLOUS DISPUTES DO NOT COME BEFORE COURTS WITHOUT CLEARANCE FROM THE HIGH POWERED COMMITTEE. IF IT CAN THE HIGH POWERED COMMITTE E WILL RESOLVE THE DISPUTE. IF THE DISPUTE IS NOT RESO LVED THE COMMITTEE WOULD UNDOUBTEDLY GIVE CLEARANCE. HO WEVER THERE COULD ALSO BE FRIVOLOUS LITIGATION PROPOS ED BY A DEPARTMENT OF THE GOVERNMENT OR A PUBLIC SECT OR UNDERTAKING. THIS COULD BE PREVENTED BY THE HIG H POWERED COMMITTEE. IN SUCH CASES THERE IS NO QUESTION O F RESOLVING THE DISPUTE. THE COMMITTEE ONLY HAS TO REFUSE PERMISSION TO LITIGATE. NO RIGHT OF THE DEPARTMENT/PUBLIC SECTO R UNDERTAKING IS AFFECTED IN SUCH A CASE. THE LITIGATION BEI NG OF A FRIVOLOUS NATURE MUST NOT BE BROUGHT TO COURT. TO BE REM EMBERED THAT IN ALMOST ALL CASES ONE OR THE OTHER PARTY WIL L NOT BE HAPPY WITH THE DECISION OF THE HIGH POWERED COMMITTE E. THE DISSATISFIED PARTY WILL ALWAYS CLAIM THAT ITS RIGHTS ARE AFFECTED WHEN IN FACT NO RIGHT IS AFFECTED. THE COMMITTEE IS CONSTITUTED OF HIGHLY PLACED OFFICERS OF THE GOV ERNMENT WHO ITA NOS. 2487 & 2488(DEL)/2010 3 DO NOT HAVE AN INTEREST IN THE DISPUTE IT IS T HUS EXPECTED THAT THEIR DECISION WILL BE FAIR AND HONEST. EVEN IF THE DEPARTMENT/PUBLIC SECTOR UNDERTAKING FINDS THE DECISION UNPALATABLE DISCIPLINE REQUIRES THAT THEY ABID E BY IT. OTHERWISE THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THIS EXERCISE W ILL BE LOST AND EVERY PARTY AGAINST WHOM THE DECISION IS GI VEN WILL CLAIM THAT THEY HAVE BEEN WRONGED AND THAT THEIR RIGHTS ARE AFFECTED. THIS SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO BE DONE . 2. IN VIEW OF THE AFORESAID DECISION BOTH THE PA RTIES FAIRLY SUBMITTED THAT THE INSTANT APPEALS MAY BE DISMISSED IN LIMIN E BY GRANTING LIBERTY TO THE ASSESSEE TO REVIVE THE APPEALS ON RECEIPT OF APPROVAL OF THE COD TO THE EXTENT THE APPROVAL IS GRANTED. 3. THUS THE APPEALS ARE DISMISSED IN LIMINE W ITH AFORESAID LIBERTY. THIS ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 27.07.2010 SOON AFTER THE COMPLETION OF THE HEARING. SD/- SD/- (RAJPAL YADAV) (K.G.BANSAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE OF ORDER: 27TH JULY 2010. SP SATIA COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO:- MMTC SCOPE COMPLEX LODHI ROAD INSTITUTIONAL AR EA NEW DELHI. DY.CIT CIRCLE-5(1) NEW DELHI. CIT(A) CIT THE DR ITAT NEW DELHI. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR.