Director Of Income Tax And Another v. M/S Ongc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITALIncome Tax Appeal No. 35 of 2009 Director of Income Tax and another ...Appellants Vs. M/s ONGC ...Respondent Mr. Hari Mohan Bhatia, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellants-Income Tax. Mr. (Dr.) Udyog Shukla, learned counsel for the respondent. Dated: 20[th] November, 2018 Coram: Hon’ble Ramesh Ranganathan, C.J.Hon’ble Alok Singh, J. Ramesh Ranganathan, C.J. (Oral) This appeal, under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, is preferred by the Revenue against the order of the Delhi Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in ITA No. 1756/DEL/89 dated 07.11.2008 for the assessment year 1983-84. 2. Against the assessment order passed by the assessing authority on 31.01.1985, the assessee carried the matter in appeal to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) who, vide order dated 04.01.1989, allowed the appeal. Against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the Revenue carried the matter in Appeal to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Delhi Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, by its order under Section 256 of the Income Tax Act dated 24.11.1992, made a reference to the Allahabad High Court. When the reference was pending consideration of the Allahabad High Court, the State of Uttarakhand came into being in the year 2000, and consequently the reference application was transferred from the Allahabad High Court to the Uttarakhand High Court which, by its order dated 16.11.2006, decided the question of law referred for its opinion against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, by its order dated 07.11.2008, gave effect to the order of the Uttarakhand High Court dated 16.11.2006 in terms of Section 260 of the Income Tax Act. Aggrieved by the said order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 07.11.2008, the Revenue is now in appeal before this Court. 3. From the facts noted hereinabove, it is evident that the order impugned in this appeal is the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 07.11.2008, which is only an order giving effect to the order passed by the Uttarakhand High Court, in the reference application, on 16.11.2006. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was obligated in law to give effect to the opinion of the Uttarakhand High Court in its order dated 16.11.2006. Any grievance, which the Revenue may have against the order of the Uttarakhand High Court dated 16.11.2006, could only have been agitated before the Supreme Court under Section 261 of the Income Tax Act. No such remedy was availed by the Revenue and the reference order dated 16.11.2006 has attained finality. The consequential order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 07.11.2008 cannot be questioned again by way of an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act since the Tribunal has only given effect to the reference order passed by the Uttarakhand High Court on 16.11.2006. 4. While Sri Hari Mohan Bhatia, learned Senior Standing Counsel, would submit that the Revenue would have the benefit of Section 14 of the Limitation Act while preferring an appeal to the Supreme Court against the order passed by the Uttarakhand High Court on 16.11.2006, at least for the period from the date on which the present appeal was filed in the year 2009 till date, we see no reason to examine this contention in the present appeal since it is only if and when the Revenue prefers an appeal to the Supreme Court against the order of the Uttarakhand High Court dated 16.11.2006, would this question necessitate examination, not by us, but by the Supreme Court. 5. The appeal fails and is accordingly dismissed. (Alok Singh, J.) 20.11.2018 Rahul (Ramesh Ranganathan, C.J.) 20.11.2018