DCIT (LTU), New Delhi v. M/s Rural Electrification Corporation Ltd.,, New Delhi

ITA 3662/DEL/2009 | misc
Pronouncement Date: 29-01-2010 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 366220114 RSA 2009
Assessee PAN AAACR4512R
Bench Delhi
Appeal Number ITA 3662/DEL/2009
Duration Of Justice 5 month(s) 1 day(s)
Appellant DCIT (LTU), New Delhi
Respondent M/s Rural Electrification Corporation Ltd.,, New Delhi
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 29-01-2010
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted F
Tribunal Order Date 29-01-2010
Date Of Final Hearing 27-01-2010
Next Hearing Date 27-01-2010
Assessment Year misc
Appeal Filed On 27-08-2009
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH F NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI I.P. BANSAL JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI B.P. JAIN ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 3662/DEL/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2001-02 DCIT (LTU) VS. M/S RURAL ELECTRIFICATION CORPORA TION LTD. NBCC PLAZA PUSHP VIHAR CORE-IV SCOPE COMPLEX 7 LODHI ROAD NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. PAN NO. AAACR4512R (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI P.C. PANCHOLI SR. DR RESPONDENT BY : SH. GAGAN GOYAL FCA ORDER PER I.P. BANSAL J.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE. IT IS DIR ECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) DATED 29.06.2009 FOR A.Y. 2001-02. 2. THE RESPONDENT IN THE PRESENT CASE IS A PUBLIC SECT OR UNDERTAKING THEREFORE APPROVAL FROM COD IS REQUIRED. NO SUCH APPROVAL FROM COD HAS BEEN FURNISHED ON RECORD. ACCORDING TO DECISION OF HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF OIL AND NATURAL GAS AND ANOTHER V. C OMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE 104 CTR SC 31 IT IS OBLIGATORY ON EVERY COU RT AND EVERY TRIBUNAL WHERE DISPUTE BETWEEN PUBLIC SECTOR UNDERTAKING AND DEPARTMENT IS RAISED TO DEMAND A CLEARANCE FROM COMMITTEE IN CASE IT HAS NOT BEEN SO PLEADED AND IN THE ABSENCE OF CLEARANCE THE PROCEEDINGS WO ULD NOT BE PROCEEDED WITH. IT WILL BE RELEVANT TO REPRODUCE FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS OF THEIR ITA NO. 3662/DEL/09 2 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 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 AGAINST A SHOW CA USE NOTICE. IT IS SETTLED LAW THAT AGAINST A SHOW CAUSE NOTICE LITIGA TION SHOULD NOT BE ENCOURAGED. THE DECISION OF THE HIGH POWERED COMM ITTEE 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 APPELLANT S COULD MOVE A COURT OF LAW AGAINST AN APPEALABLE ORDER. BY NOT MAINTA INING DISCIPLINE 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 PROCEEDINGS MUST NOT BE PROCEEDED WITH. THIS POSITION IS FURTHER CLARIFIED IN CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS CASE WHERE AGAIN THIS COURT HAS HELD THAT THE DECI SION TAKEN BY SUCH A COMMITTEE IS BINDING ON ALL 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 APPELLANTS THESE PROCEEDINGS CANNOT BE PROCEEDED WITH. THE HIGH COURT WAS WRON G IN DEALING WITH THE MERITS OF THE MATTER. WE THEREFORE DO NOT EXAMINE WHETHER THE HIGH COURT WAS RIGHT ON MERITS. THE APPEAL AC CORDINGLY STANDS DISPOSED OF WITH NO ORDER AS TO COSTS. ITA NO. 3662/DEL/09 3 4. NO SUCH APPROVAL FROM COD HAS BEEN FURNISHED BY THE REVENUE THEREFORE IN THE ABSENCE OF CLEARANCE FROM COD THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE CANNOT BE PROCEEDED WITH. AS SUCH THIS AP PEAL IS DISMISSED FOR WANT OF CLEARANCE FROM COD. WE MAY OBSERVE THAT I F LATER ON IN CASE THE REVENUE IS ABLE TO OBTAIN CLEARANCE FROM COD IT MAY APPROACH THE TRIBUNAL FOR REVIVAL OF THIS APPEAL. WITH THESE OBSERVATION S THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 29.1.2010 (B.P. JAIN) (I.P. BANSA L) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JU DICIAL MEMBER DATED: *KAVITA CHOPRA COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER DEPUTY REGISTRAR