DCIT, Circle - 6, Kolkata, Kolkata v. United Bank of India, Kolkata

ITA 568/KOL/2010 | 2002-2003
Pronouncement Date: 28-01-2011

Appeal Details

RSA Number 56823514 RSA 2010
Assessee PAN AAACU5624P
Bench Kolkata
Appeal Number ITA 568/KOL/2010
Duration Of Justice 10 month(s) 9 day(s)
Appellant DCIT, Circle - 6, Kolkata, Kolkata
Respondent United Bank of India, Kolkata
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 28-01-2011
Appeal Filed By Department
Bench Allotted A
Tribunal Order Date 28-01-2011
Date Of Final Hearing 28-01-2011
Next Hearing Date 28-01-2011
Assessment Year 2002-2003
Appeal Filed On 19-03-2010
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH : KOLKATA () BEFORE . . . . . . . . !' !' !' !' /AND . .. . . .. .! !! ! # ) [BEFORE HONBLE SRI D. K. TYAGI JM & HONBLE SRI C . D. RAO AM] '$ '$ '$ '$ / I.T.A NO. 568/KOL/2010 %&' !() %&' !() %&' !() %&' !()/ // / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2002-03 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX -VS- UNITED BA NK OF INDIA CIRCLE-6 KOLKATA. (PA NO. AAACU 5624 P) ( + /APPELLANT ) (-+ / RESPONDENT ) FOR THE APPELLANT : SMT. BONANI GHOSH FOR THE RESPONDENT : SRI S. CHOUDHURY . / ORDER PER D. K. TYAGI JM ( . . . . . . . . ) THIS APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED A GAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) KOLKATA DATED 23.12.2009 FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2002-03. 2. WE HAVE HEARD SMT. BONANI GHOSH THE LD. DR AND SRI S. CHOWDHURY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE 3. THE ASSESSEE/RESPONDENT IN THIS CASE IS UNITED BANK OF INDIA WHICH IS A PUBLIC SECTOR UNDERTAKING. IN TERMS OF HONBLE SUPREME COU RTS DECISION IN THE CASE OF ONGC VS. COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE (104 CTR 31) WHENE VER THERE IS A DISPUTE BETWEEN A GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT AND A PUBLIC SECTOR UNDERTAKI NG IT IS ESSENTIAL THAT THE REVENUE/APPELLANT AS THE CASE MAY BE TO OBTAIN TH E PERMISSION OF THE HIGH POWERED COMMITTEE (HPC). HOWEVER IN THIS PRESENT CASE NO SUCH CLEARANCE FROM THE HIGH POWERED COMMITTEE HAS BEEN OBTAINED BY THE APPELLAN T FOR PURSUING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 4. THE HONBLE APEX COURT IN MAHANAGAR TELEPHONE NI GAM LTD. V. CHAIRMAN CBDT (2004) 267 ITR 647 AT PAGE 652 HAS AGAIN POINT ED OUT AS UNDER :- UNDOUBTEDLY THE RIGHT TO ENFORCE A RIGHT IN COURT OF LAW CANNOT BE EFFACED. HOWEVER IT MUST BE REMEMBERED THAT COURTS ARE OVER-BURDENED WITH A LARGE NUMBER OF CASES. THE MAJORITY OF SUCH CASES PERTAIN TO GOVERNMENT DEPART MENTS AND/OR PUBLIC SECTOR 2 UNDERTAKINGS. AS IS STATED IN CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS CASE (2003) 3 SCC 472 IT WAS NOT CONTEMPLATED BY THE FRAMERS OF THE CONSTITU TION OR THE CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE THAT TWO DEPARTMENTS OF A STATE OR UNION OF INDIA A ND/OR A DEPARTMENT OF THE GOVERNMENT AND A PUBLIC SECTOR UNDERTAKING FIGHT A LITIGATION IN A COURT OF LAW. SUCH A COURSE IS DETRIMENTAL TO PUBLIC INTEREST AS IT ENTA ILS AVOIDABLE WASTAGE OF PUBLIC MONEY AND TIME. THESE ARE ALL LIMBS OF THE GOVERNMENT AND MUST ACT IN CO-ORDINATION AND NOT CONFRONTATION. THE MECHANISM SET UP BY THIS COURT I S NOT AS SUGGESTED BY MR. ANDHYARUJINA ONLY TO CONCILIATE 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 CA N THE HIGH POWERED COMMITTEE WILL RESOLVE THE DISPUTE. IF THE DISPUTE IS NOT RES OLVED THE COMMITTEE WOULD UNDOUBTEDLY GIVE CLEARANCE. HOWEVER THERE COULD ALSO BE FRIVOL OUS LITIGATION PROPOSED BY A DEPARTMENT OF THE GOVERNMENT OR A PUBLIC SECTOR UND ERTAKING. THIS COULD BE PREVENTED BY THE HIGH POWERED COMMITTEE. IN SUCH CASES THERE IS NO QUESTION OF RESOLVING THE DISPUTE. THE COMMITTEE ONLY HAS TO REFUSE PERMISSIO N TO LITIGATE. NO RIGHT OF THE DEPARTMENT/PUBLIC SECTOR UNDERTAKING IS AFFECTED IN SUCH A CASE. THE LITIGATION BEING A FRIVOLOUS NATURE MUST NOT BE BROUGHT TO COURT. TO B E REMEMBERED THAT IN ALMOST ALL CASES ONE OR THE OTHER PARTY WILL NOT BE HAPPY WITH THE DECISION OF THE HIGH POWERED COMMITTEE. THE DISSATISFIED PARTY WILL ALWAYS CLAIM THAT ITS RIGHTS AFFECTED WHEN IN FACT NO RIGHT IS AFFECTED. THE COMMITTEE IS CONSTITUTED OF HIGHLY PLACED OFFICERS OF THE GOVERNMENT WHO DO NOT HAVE AN INTEREST IN THE DISP UTE IT IS THUS EXPECTED THAT THEIR DECISION WILL BE FAIR AND HONEST. EVEN IF THE DEPAR TMENT/ PUBLIC SECTOR UNDERTAKING FINDS THE DECISION UNPALATABLE DISCIPLINE REQUIRES THAT THEY ABIDE BY IT. OTHERWISE THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THIS EXERCISE WILL BE LOST AND EVERY PAR TY AGAINST WHOM THE DECISION IS GIVEN WILL CLAIM THAT THEY HAVE BEEN WRONGED AND THAT THE IR RIGHTS ARE AFFECTED. THIS SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO BE DONE. 5. IN THE ABSENCE OF THE CLEARANCE FROM THE HIGH PO WERED COMMITTEE THE APPEAL IS NOT REQUIRED TO BE ENTERTAINED AT THIS STAGE AND T HEREFORE WE DISMISS THE APPEAL AS NOT MAINTAINABLE IN LAW. HOWEVER IT WILL BE OPEN FOR T HE APPELLANT TO FILE AN APPLICATION FOR REVIVAL OF THE APPEAL AFTER CLEARANCE IS OBTAINED. THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED ACCORDINGLY. 6. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE STANDS DISMISSED. 7. THE ORDER WAS ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- . . ! # . . (C. D. RAO) (D. K. TYAGI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER ( # # # #) )) ) DATED : 28 TH JANUARY 2011 !/0 %&12 %3! JD.(SR.P.S.) 3 . 4 -%%5 65(7- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. + / APPELLANT DCIT CIRCLE-6 KOLKATA. 2 -+ / RESPONDENT UNITED BANK OF INDIA 16 OLD COURT H OUSE ST. KOLKATA-700 001.. 3. %.&/ THE CIT KOLKATA. 4. %.& ()/ THE CIT(A) KOLKATA. 5. !=% -%& / DR KOLKATA BENCHES KOLKATA 5 -%/ TRUE COPY .&>/ BY ORDER ? '2 /DEPUTY REGISTRAR .