TMI Blog2005 (7) TMI 76X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Authority - - - - - Dated:- 7-7-2005 - Judge(s) : SWATANTER KUMAR., MADAN B. LOKUR JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by Swatanter Kumar J.- Notice to show cause why the appeals be not admitted returnable on September 10, 2002, was issued by a Division Bench of this court in all the above appeals vide order dated May 20, 2002. In response to it the respondent-assessee appeared and took an objection in its submission that the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal had passed an order in favour of the assessee for the assessment year 1988-89 which has not been challenged by the Department and as such all subsequent appeals would have to be dismissed or adversely affected. The pendency of this matter became a matter of concern for the court as it was stated at the Bar in different cases including the above appeals, that orders passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal are not served upon the Department for years together, while on the other hand the contention of counsel appearing for the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was that the orders are duly communicated or served upon the authorities but sometimes they decline to accept the same and the delay is not attributabl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cate the order to the parties and the Tribunal has been complying with the directive contained in rule 35 of the Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963. In other words, there is no statutory obligation upon the Tribunal to pronounce the judgments during working hours and after showing them in the cause list of the Tribunal. The Tribunal has not been following such a practice and does not wish to start the same being not a mandate of law. Arguments at some length were addressed by learned counsel appearing for the parties as well as learned counsel appearing for the Appellate Tribunal in this regard. Serious controversy has been raised before this court on behalf of the Registrar of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal on the one hand and the income-tax authorities on the other, in regard to the obligation of the Appellate Tribunal to pronounce orders, timely communicate the copy thereof to the parties, and their receipt. The submissions were made with some emphasis on this aspect of the matter, thus we reserved our orders in this regard, however, adjourned the appeals for hearing on the merits. While referring to the present case counsel appearing for the income-tax authorities had placed o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has specifically spelled out the same by use of such expression in the section itself. Reference in this regard has been made to the provisions of section 245R(6) of the Act wherein the authority entertaining an application for advance ruling under section 245Q is to pronounce its advance ruling in writing within six months from the date of the application. As is apparent from the above submissions, the entire emphasis is upon the use of two different expressions in sections 254 and 245R of the Act and the authority shall pronounce such "orders". In this case, we are not concerned with the interpretations of charging or substantive provisions of a statute, but are concerned with the ambit and scope of a procedural law. It may not be thus, necessary for the court to construe these procedural sections which are enabling the respective authorities under the provisions of the statute in regard to entertainment of applications and pronouncement of orders. The strict construction suggested on behalf of the Tribunal would neither be in administration of justice nor would be permissible in conformity with the settled principles of interpretation of procedural law. The fine distinction bet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are or affirm; to declare aloud and in a formal manner. In this sense a court is said to 'pronounce' judgment or a sentence." The Supreme Court in the case of ITAT v. V.K. Agarwal [1999] 235 ITR 175 (SC); [1999] 1 SCC 16 stated that under the Income-tax Tribunal Rules "final order" means the order of the Bench, signed and dated by the Members constituting it. After the order is signed, the Tribunal shall cause it to be communicated to the assessee and the Commissioner. The expression "order" in law is understood to be a mandate, precept; command or direction authoritatively given. The expression is wide enough to include an interim order, and final order. We are concerned with the final order in the present case and any authoritative direction, injunction, a decision upon reasoning in writing would be an order. It would include every decision and award made under the provisions of the Act. Again "order" is said to be a formal expression to a decision which may not be a decree. Objective analysis of the above discussion would show that in substance there is really no distinction between the meaning of the expression "pass" or "pronounce" and consequences thereof. "Passing of order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... w the contents of the order on the very date of its signing and declaration cannot be denied. No procedure of law is known to prejudice the party in this manner. "Declaration of an order" or as it is understood in law as "pronouncement" is official declaration. The order is pronounced to the parties and not behind their back. Of course, limitation may start from the date the order is communicated to the parties in terms of the provisions of the Act. The rules of procedure are always to further the cause of justice and avoid prejudice to the litigating parties. The provisions of section 254(1) cannot be construed, so as to exclude the act of pronouncement. In fact, this provision does not deal with the manner of writing, dating or pronouncement of orders, but is a provision which primarily deals with the empowerment of the Tribunal to pass appropriate orders in the given facts and circumstances of a case. Even if the provisions were silent in that regard to read the word "pronouncement", to include such an act would be necessary by the very nature of things and would impose an obligation upon the Tribunal to pronounce its orders on the occasion when they are dated and signed by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the subsequent years the assessee or the Revenue may file appeals while the matters remained pending because the Department is neither aware of the judgment nor a copy thereof has been communicated to them by the Registrar of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in accordance with the rules, as is sufficiently exhibited by narration of the above facts. Years have gone and copies of the orders were not communicated, and if communicated were allegedly declined by the officers of the Department as not belonging to their circles. This state of affairs, must end. The appeal for the assessment year 1989-90 can hardly serve any purpose after the appeal for the year 2000-01 is preferred by the Revenue or the assessee. Pronouncement of an order would certainly put the parties at notice and they would be able to take recourse to the remedies available to them under law with some urgency, if required. Rule 5A was introduced in Order 20 of the Code, requiring the court to inform the parries present in court, if not represented by a counsel, as to which court an appeal would lie and the period of limitation and also place on file information to that effect. This no way diluted the other provisi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on available to the litigant in law. The very foundation of administration of justice is firmly laid down in the rule of law, and all authorities/Tribunals are constitutionally mandated to act in conformity to the said rule. We see no reason as to why the practice prevalent in the courts in relation to dating, signing and pronouncement of judgment should not be fully made applicable to the cases pending before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. In our view such a practice would not be opposed by any provisions of the Income-tax Act, on the contrary, the basic rule of law as well as accepted norms of administration of justice would require the Tribunal to follow such a practice. In no uncertain terms, we would say that the stand taken before us on behalf of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is without substance and merit. In exercise of our extraordinary jurisdiction under articles 226-227 of the Constitution of India we would direct the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to pronounce its judgments and orders in open hearing and upon enlisting them for a given date. This practice shall be adopted by the Tribunal in addition to its obligation to communicate the orders as contemplated unde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
