Delhi High Court
National Co-Op. Devp. Corpn. vs Assistant Director Of It on 24 August, 2004
Equivalent citations: 2004 141 TAXMAN 551 Delhi
JUDGMENT
1. Initially one matter was filed though two different assessment years were involved. However, now two appeals are filed, one in respect of each assessment year.
1. Initially one matter was filed though two different assessment years were involved. However, now two appeals are filed, one in respect of each assessment year.
2. These appeals arise out of ITA Nos. 5539-5540 (Delhi)/1995 before the Tribunal for assessment years 1979-80 and 1980-81. In view of the decision of the Apex Court, the appellant approached the Committee on Disputes, which, permitted the appellant to pursue the appeals before Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the ITAT) and accordingly appeals were heard by the ITAT. After the disposal of the appeals by the ITAT the appellant has not approached the Committee on disputes for clearance to prosecute these appeals before us. In view of the decision of the Apex Court in case of Oil & Natural Gas Commission v. CCE 1995 Suppl. (4) SCC 541 and Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. v. Chairman, CBDT 2004 (5) SCALE 705 (SC), we feel that permission is also required for contesting the appeals before this court. Though these appeals have been filed without prior clearance of High Powered Committee, the appellant is not precluded from approaching the authority in this behalf. In paragraph 6 of the decision in the case of Oil & Natural Gas Commission v. CCE (IA Nos. 3 and 4 of 1992 and CA Nos. 2058-59 of 1988 dated 7-1-1994), the Apex Court pointed out that the matter is required to be referred to the High Power Committee with prior notice to the designated authority in the Cabinet Secretariat of the government of India authorised to receive notice in that behalf. It is clear that in order to coordinate these references of the High Power Committee the Government nominated the Under Secretary (Coordination) in the Cabinet Secretariat as the nodal authority to coordinate these references. The Apex Court pointed out that "the reference shall be deemed to have been made and become effective only after a notice of the reference is lodged with the said nodal authority. The reference shall be deemed to be valid if made in the case of the Union of India by its Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue and in the case of Public Sector Undertakings by its Chairman, Managing Director or Chief Executive, as the case may be. It is only after such reference to the High Power Committee is made in the manner indicated that the operation of the order or proceedings under challenge shall be suspended till the High Power Committee resolves the dispute or gives clearance to the litigation." According to the decision, the learned counsel for the appellant stated that appropriate authority shall be moved within a period of four weeks from today. If that is so, then, till that period no coercive action shall be taken by the revenue in these matters. Resultantly, these appeals are disposed of with liberty to the appellant to revive the appeals in case the clearance is granted.
2. These appeals arise out of ITA Nos. 5539-5540 (Delhi)/1995 before the Tribunal for assessment years 1979-80 and 1980-81. In view of the decision of the Apex Court, the appellant approached the Committee on Disputes, which, permitted the appellant to pursue the appeals before Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the ITAT) and accordingly appeals were heard by the ITAT. After the disposal of the appeals by the ITAT the appellant has not approached the Committee on disputes for clearance to prosecute these appeals before us. In view of the decision of the Apex Court in case of Oil & Natural Gas Commission v. CCE 1995 Suppl. (4) SCC 541 and Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. v. Chairman, CBDT 2004 (5) SCALE 705 (SC), we feel that permission is also required for contesting the appeals before this court. Though these appeals have been filed without prior clearance of High Powered Committee, the appellant is not precluded from approaching the authority in this behalf. In paragraph 6 of the decision in the case of Oil & Natural Gas Commission v. CCE (IA Nos. 3 and 4 of 1992 and CA Nos. 2058-59 of 1988 dated 7-1-1994), the Apex Court pointed out that the matter is required to be referred to the High Power Committee with prior notice to the designated authority in the Cabinet Secretariat of the government of India authorised to receive notice in that behalf. It is clear that in order to coordinate these references of the High Power Committee the Government nominated the Under Secretary (Coordination) in the Cabinet Secretariat as the nodal authority to coordinate these references. The Apex Court pointed out that "the reference shall be deemed to have been made and become effective only after a notice of the reference is lodged with the said nodal authority. The reference shall be deemed to be valid if made in the case of the Union of India by its Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue and in the case of Public Sector Undertakings by its Chairman, Managing Director or Chief Executive, as the case may be. It is only after such reference to the High Power Committee is made in the manner indicated that the operation of the order or proceedings under challenge shall be suspended till the High Power Committee resolves the dispute or gives clearance to the litigation." According to the decision, the learned counsel for the appellant stated that appropriate authority shall be moved within a period of four weeks from today. If that is so, then, till that period no coercive action shall be taken by the revenue in these matters. Resultantly, these appeals are disposed of with liberty to the appellant to revive the appeals in case the clearance is granted.
