Commissioner Of Income Tax-2 v. M/S Central Bank Of India

Rng IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYAPPELLATE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.5737 OF 2014 Commissioner of Income Tax-2.. vs. M/s Central Bank of India . Petitioner .. Respondents --- Mr.Suresh Kumar for PetitionerMr.F.U.Irani i/b Mr.A.K.Jasani for Respondents …. CORAM : M.S.SANKLECHA & G.S.KULKARNI, J P. C. DATED : 16 JULY, 2014 This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeks to challenge the order dated 17.5.2013 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) dismissing the petitioner's Misc.Application under section 254 (2) of the Income Tax Act 1961 (the Act) dated 5.12.2012 seeking a recall of its order dated 2.8.2010 passed for A.Y.1997-98. 2. The basis of the petitioner's Misc.Application was the non- Rng 2wp5737.14 consideration of four issues by the ITAT as the Committee on Disputes (COD) by order dated 14.1.2001 denied permission to prosecute the issues in appeal before the ITAT. This Misc.Application for recall came to be filed in view of the order dated 17.2.2011 of the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.1883 of 2011 ElectronicsCorporation of India Ltd vs.Union of India & ors by which it recalled its earlier directions rendered in the matters of ONGC setting up the COD mechanism. This was on the ground that the mechanism of obtaining a clearance from COD has outlived its utility. Thus in the changed scenario the earlier directions of the Supreme Court in the matter of the ONGC case were recalled. 3. Mr.Suresh Kumar learned counsel for the Revenue in support of the petition states that in view of the Supreme Court decision in Electronics Corporation of India Ltd(supra) clearance/approval from the COD not being necessary to file an appeal to ITAT the non-granting of approval by the COD is non-est in law. This being the position the ITAT is duty bound to consider all the four issues which were not allowed to be agitated before the ITAT by the COD. 4.We do not find any merit in the contention of the revenue. At the time when the petitioner's appeal was filed before the ITAT, the COD mechanism was very much in place. The petitioner had applied for the necessary permission to the COD to file and agitate 5 issues before the ITAT. The COD rejected 4 issues out of the 5 issues for which permission was sought. The order of the Supreme Court in Electronics Corporation of India Ltd(supra) does not nullify or invalidate the orders passed under the COD mechanism. The Supreme Court in Electronics Corporation of India Ltd (supra) has merely stated that the COD mechanism has outlived its utility and in the changed scenario,the COD mechanism would not be necessary. If the petitioner's contention are to be accepted then all applications which have been rejected by the COD during the period of its existence from 1991-92 up to the date of the decision of the Supreme Court on 17.2.2011 in the matter of Electronics Corporation of IndiaLtdwould lead to raking up old and settled issues which were not Rng 4 wp5737.14 found fit for consideration of the ITAT. If we accept the interpretation put by the revenue then all the parties to whom COD mechanism applied would be entitled to recall orders for fresh consideration leading to uncertainty in respect of closed matters. The interpretation of the revenue of the Apex Court's order in Electronics Corporation of India (supra) is not a proper reading of the same. In view of the above, we do not find any merit in the submissions made by Mr.Suresh Kumar the learned counsel for the revenue. 5.Consequently, we find no flaw in the impugned order dated 17.5.2013 of ITAT rejecting the petitioner's Misc.Application dated 6.12.2012 seeking a recall of the order dated 2.8.2010 for A.Y.1997-98.17.5.2013 of ITAT rejecting the petitioner's Misc.Application dated 6.12.2012 seeking a recall of the order dated 2.8.2010 for A.Y.1997-98. 6.Accordingly, petition is dismissed with no order as to costs. 5.Consequently, we find no flaw in the impugned order dated 17.5.2013 of ITAT rejecting the petitioner's Misc.Application dated 6.12.2012 seeking a recall of the order dated 2.8.2010 for A.Y.1997-98.17.5.2013 of ITAT rejecting the petitioner's Misc.Application dated 6.12.2012 seeking a recall of the order dated 2.8.2010 for A.Y.1997-98. 6.Accordingly, petition is dismissed with no order as to costs. (G.S.KULKARNI, J) (M.S.SANKLECHA, J) Rng Rng Rng