DCIT, New Delhi v. M/s. National Cooperative Development Corporation, New Delhi

ITA 4345/DEL/2009 | 2000-2001
Pronouncement Date: 13-01-2010 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 434520114 RSA 2009
Assessee PAN AAACN1964F
Bench Delhi
Appeal Number ITA 4345/DEL/2009
Duration Of Justice 2 month(s)
Appellant DCIT, New Delhi
Respondent M/s. National Cooperative Development Corporation, New Delhi
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 13-01-2010
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted F
Tribunal Order Date 13-01-2010
Date Of Final Hearing 13-01-2010
Next Hearing Date 13-01-2010
Assessment Year 2000-2001
Appeal Filed On 13-11-2009
Judgment Text
ITA NO. 4345/DELHI/09 A.Y. 2000-01 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH F DELHI) BEFORE SHRI C.L. SETHI JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 4345/DEL/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2000-01 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. M/S NATIONAL COOPERATIVE CIRCLE13(1) ROOM NO. 406 DEVELOPMENT CORPORATI ON 4 CR BUILDING IP ESTATE SIRI INSTITUTIONAL AREA HAUZ NEW DELHI KHAS NEW DELHI [PAN: AAACN1964F] (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI ISTIYEQUE AHMED SR. DR RESPONDENT BY: SHRI KVSR KRISHNA CA ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA AM THE APPELLANT IN THE PRESENT APPEAL IS DEPARTMENT. RESPONDENT IN THE PRESENT CASE IS PUBLIC SECTOR UND ERTAKING/ GOVT. OF INDIA UNDERTAKING. ACCORDING TO THE DECISION OF HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF OIL & NATURAL GAS COMMISSION & ANOTHER V. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE 104 CTR 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 CL EARANCE FROM COMMITTEE IN CASE IT HAS NOT BEEN SO PLEADED AND IN THE ABSENCE OF CLEARANCE THE PROCEEDINGS WOULD NOT BE PROCEEDED W ITH. IT WILL BE RELEVANT TO REPRODUCE FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS OF THE IR 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 PLEAD ED AND IN 2 THE ABSENCE OF THE 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 OBSERV ATIONS:- 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 SHO W CAUSE NOTICE LITIGATION SHOULD NOT BE ENCOURAGED. THE DECISION OF THE HIGH POWERED COMMITTEE SET OUT HEREINABOVE MERELY EMPH ASIZES THE WELL-SETTLED POSITION. IT IS AN EMINENTLY FAIR AND CORRECT DECISION. THE PURPOSE OF THE DECISION WAS TO PREV ENT FRIVOLOUS LITIGATION. NO RIGHT OF THE APPELLANTS IS BEING A FFECTED. IT HAS BEEN CLARIFIED THAT THE APPELLANTS COULD MOVE A COU RT OF LAW AGAINST AN APPEALABLE ORDER. BY NOT MAINTAINING D ISCIPLINE AND ABIDING BY THE DECISION THE APPELLANTS HAVE WA STED PUBLIC MONEY AND TIME OF THE COURTS. THE CLARIFICATORY O RDER 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 PROCEEDI NGS MUST NOT BE PROCEEDED WITH. THIS POSITION IS FURTHER CLARI FIED IN CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS CASE WHERE AGAIN THIS COURT HAS HELD THAT THE DECISION TAKEN BY SUCH A COMMITTEE IS BIND ING 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 APPELL ANTS THESE PROCEEDINGS CANNOT BE PROCEEDED WITH. THE HIGH CO URT WAS WRONG IN DEALING WITH THE MERITS OF THE MATTER. W E THEREFORE DO NOT EXAMINE WHETHER THE HIGH COURT WAS RIGHT ON MERITS. THE APPEAL ACCORDINGLY STANDS DISPOSED OF WITH NO O RDER 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 3 THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED FOR WANT OF CLEARANCE FROM COD. WE MAY OBSERVE THAT IF LATER ON IN CASE THE DEPARTMENT IS ABLE TO OBTAIN CLEARANCE FROM COD IT MAY APPROACH THE TRIBUNAL FOR REVIVAL OF THIS APPEAL. WITH THESE OBSERVATIONS THE APPEAL IS DISM ISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 13/01/2010 UP ON CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING. SD/- SD/- [C.L. SETHI] [SHAMIM YAHYA] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE13/01/ 2010 SRB COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER DEPUTY REGISTRAR ITAT DELHI BENCHES