TMI Blog2009 (10) TMI 68X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ddition of Rs. 1,61,08,000 on account of plantation expenses. 3. Other grounds, if any, shall be pressed at the time of hearing." ITA No. 62/Ctk/2009 (by the assessee): "1. That the sustaining of the disallowance for a sum of Rs. 54,33,713 under the nomenclature 'prior period adjustments' by the learned CIT(A) is contrary to facts, arbitrary, excessive, unjustified, erroneous and bad in law. 2. That without prejudice to ground (1) above, assuming but not admitting that the said sum of Rs. 54,33,713 are expenses of past years, it is submitted that the rates of income-tax for the assessment under consideration being either equal to or lower than the rates in the past assessment years and the assessee having losses in the past years, a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... R 14 (Guj) and submitted that the Tribunal has no power to determine as to whether the appeal should be admitted or not except in the circumstances as provided by sub-s. (5) of s. 253 of the Act. Sub-s. (5) of s. 253 of the Act provides that when an appeal or cross-objection is filed after the expiry of the relevant period referred to in sub-s. (3) or sub-s. (4) the Tribunal has power not to admit the appeal or cross-objection if it is not satisfied that there was a sufficient cause for not presenting it within that period. The learned Departmental Representative submitted that there is no provision in the IT Act which stipulates that the Tribunal has any right of holding that appeal cannot be admitted in the absence of approval from CoD. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al Development Corpn. Ltd. vs. ITAT along with the decision of the Hon'ble apex Court in the case of ONGC vs. CIDCO and also the decision of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Tamilnadu Warehousing Corporation vs. Dy. CIT (200B) 15 DTR (Mad) 67. 5.1 Their Lordships of the Hon'ble apex Court in the case of Oil Natural Gas Commission Anr. vs. CCE (1992) 104 CTR (SC) 31 observed that intra Government litigation between various organs of Government of India including its public sector undertakings, are being litigated in judicial forums, that on more than one occasion it was pointed out that public sector undertakings of the Central Government and the Union of India should not fight their litigations in Court by spending money o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arance from the committee and in case the appeals are filed without the clearance of the high powered committee, so as to save litigation, the appellant or petitioner, as the case may be, shall within one month from such filing, refer the matter to the high powered committee with prior notice to the designated authorities in the Cabinet Secretariat (Under Secretary and Co-ordinator) otherwise to receive notice in this behalf. 5.2 In view of the above direction of the Hon'ble apex Court and subsequent issue of office memorandum by of Government of India constituting the high powered committee on disputes settlement, the Tribunal inter alia insist the Central Government enterprises/Central Government public sector undertaking and/or Departm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of India must evolve a mechanism for resolving inter-Departmental controversies. Their Lordships noted that it is the obligation of every Court or Tribunal where such dispute is raised, to demand a clearance of the committee in case it has not been so pleaded. In the absence of such a clearance, the pr9ceedings will not be proceeded with. In the back drop of the above case, and having noted that the clearance of the committee was not obtained, the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case ,of Tamilnadu Warehousing Corporation concluded that "hence the appeal is dismissed as not maintainable in the absence of clearance, however, by giving liberty to the appellant to move this Court after obtaining clearance from the CoD". 5.5 It is relevant t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Central Government or between two Departments of the State Government of Andhra Pradesh. Their Lordships of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court have held that there is no order made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court which relates to a dispute between Union of India and a State, or a Department of the Union of India and a State, or a public sector undertaking of Union of India and a State, or between two States inter se, the term "State" here to mean and including the State Government, a Department of the State Government or an undertaking of the State Government. Their Lordships of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court have held that it is not possible to expand the scope of directions of the Supreme Court so as to include a dispute between a Department of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
