Vs.commissioner Of Income Tax,Vidarbha,Nagpur And 2 Ors v. Mohta Andc. L. Pangarkar J. Dated: 7[Th] August, 2007

1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYNAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR. WRIT PETITION NO.1232 OF 2001. Union of India, Ministry of Railway, New Delhi and another. .vs.Commissioner of Income Tax,Vidarbha,Nagpur and 2 ors. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Office Notes, Office Memoranda ofCoram, appearances, Court's Orders orCourt's or Judge's Ordersdirections and Registrar's orders. Mr.R.S.Sundaram,Adv.for the petitioners.Mr.A.S.Jaiswal, Adv. for the respondents no. 1 and 2. Coram: ANOOP V. MOHTA andC. L. PANGARKAR J. Dated: 7[th] AUGUST, 2007. 1.This is a writ petition filed by Ministry ofRailway,therebychallengedtheorderdated22/2/2001 passed by the Commissioner, IncomeTax under Section 264 of the Income Tax Act,1961. Without going further into the merits of thematter, both the counsel fairly stated that pursuanttotheorderreferredinAIR 2004 SC 2434(Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. ..vs.. Chairman,Central Board, Direct Taxes and another),which reads as under - “We direct that the Government of IndiashallsetupaCommitteeconsistingrepresentativesfromtheMinistryofIndustry, the Bureau of Public Enterprisesand the Ministryof Law, to monitordisputes between Ministry and Ministry ofGovernment of India; Ministry and PublicSector Undertaking of the Government ofIndia and Public Sector Undertakings inbetween themselves to ensure that nolitigation comes to Court or to a TribunalwithoutthematterhavingbeenfirstexaminedbytheCommitteeanditsclearance for litigation. Government mayinclude a representative of the Ministryconcerned in a specific case and one fromthe Ministry of Finance in the Committee,Senior Officers only should be nominatedso that the Committee would functionwith status, control and discipline” 3 and also in (2007)7 SCC 39 (Oil and Natural GasCorporation Ltd. ..vs.. City and IndustrialDevelopment Corporation, Maharashtra Ltd. andothers),the Government of India has constituted aHighPowerCommitteetoresolvethesaiddisputes.In other similarly situated matter, suchdisputewasreferredbetweenAssistantCommissioner of Income Tax, Nagpur ..vs.. CentralRailway.In view of this, without observinganything, this matter be referred to the saidCommittee to settle the dispute and decide it inaccordance with law. The petitioners to take stepsaccordingly. As there is interim order passed by thiscourt, that interim order shall continue till thedecision of Committee as referred above.Allpoints are kept open and liberty is also granted. chute JUDGE. JUDGE. 4