DIRECTOR CIVIL AVIATION PUNJAB vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHANDIGARH

PDF · subscribers
ITA/195/2008HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01080162200813 February 2008Author: MR JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG,MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court observed that the appellant's counsel could not satisfy the court whether the State of Punjab had taken a conscious decision to file an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) before the Tribunal. In view of this, the High Court directed the appellant to first move an application for revival of the appeals before the Tribunal itself. The appellant should state all the facts in this application, place on record the resolution of the Government, and other material showing that no approval from the Committee of Disputes is required for the present dispute. If such an application is filed within one month, the Tribunal shall consider and decide it in accordance with law, after hearing the appellant, by passing a speaking order. The appeals before the High Court were disposed of with these observations.

What were the facts?

The Director Civil Aviation, Punjab, Chandigarh (the appellant) filed eight appeals before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (the Tribunal) against orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for assessment years 1996-1997 to 2002-2003 and 2005-2006. The Tribunal dismissed these appeals without considering them on merits. The dismissal was based on the ground that the appellant's counsel failed to show permission to pursue the appeals, as accorded by the Committee of Disputes, citing Supreme Court judgments in ONGC v. Collector, Central Excise. The Tribunal noted that the appeals could be restored if clearance from the Committee of Disputes was obtained.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeals filed by the appellant before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal were liable to be dismissed for want of permission from the Committee of Disputes, as per the directions of the Supreme Court in ONGC v. Collector, Central Excise. Assessee's Contention: The appellant contended that the Committee of Disputes is constituted only for inter-se disputes between departments of the Central Government and the State Government. Therefore, a dispute between the appellant and the Income Tax Department does not require consideration by the Committee of Disputes. The appellant referred to a letter dated 21.11.2007 from the Under Secretary to support this. However, the appellant's counsel could not satisfy the High Court whether the State of Punjab had taken a conscious decision to file an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order before the Tribunal. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contention from the revenue.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. I.T.A.s No. 195 to 202 of 2008 DATE OF DECISION : 13.02.2008 Director Civil Aviation Punjab, Chandigarh .... APPELLANT Versus Commissioner of Income Tax, Chandigarh ..... RESPONDENT CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG

Present: Mr. Pankaj Jain & Mr. Prakul Khurana, Advocates, for the appellant.

* * * SATISH KUMAR MITTAL, J. ( Oral ) This order shall dispose of Income Tax Appeals No. 195 to 202 of 2008, as the same are arising from one and the same order. These appeals have been filed by the Director Civil Aviation Punjab, Chandigarh against the order dated 22.10.2007, whereby the eight appeals filed by the appellant before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as `the Tribunal') against the orders of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) Chandigarh [hereinafter referred to as CIT (A)] dated 28.2.2007, for the assessment years 1996-1997 to 2002-2003 and 2005-2006, raising a common question -2- of law, have been dismissed, without considering the appeals on merits, only on the ground that counsel for the appellant failed to show the permission to pursue the appeals, accorded by the Committee of Disputes. However, it was observed that in case “clearance” is obtained from the Committee of Disputes, the appellant shall get the appeals restored by moving an application. The said order was passed in terms of the various judgments of the Supreme Court i.e. in Oil & Natural Gas Commission v. Collector, Central Excise, (1994) 70 ELT 45 (S.C.) and Oil & Natural Gas Commission v. Collector, Central Excise, (1992) Supplementary (4) SCC

541.

Learned counsel for the appellant, while referring to a letter dated 21.11.2007, written by Under Secretary, intimating the appellant that the Committee of Disputes is only constituted for the purpose of inter-se disputes between Department of Central Government and the State Government, contends that as far as the dispute between appellant and the Income Tax Department is concerned, that is not to be considered by the Committee of Disputes. However, learned counsel could not satisfy this court whether the State of Punjab has taken any conscious decision to file appeal against the order of the CIT (A) before the Tribunal. In view of the above, we are of the opinion that let the appellant first move an application for revival of appeals before the Tribunal itself by stating all these facts after placing on record the resolution of the Government as well as other material showing that as far as the present -3- dispute is concerned, no approval from Committee of Disputes is required. If any such application is filed by the appellant within a period of one month, the same shall be considered and decided by the Tribunal in accordance with law, after hearing the appellant, by passing the speaking order. With the aforesaid observations, all these appeals stand disposed of. ( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL ) JUDGE February 13, 2008 ( RAKESH KUMAR GARG ) ndj JUDGE

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →