2013 (4) TMI 14 - HC - Income Tax

COD Clearance - revenue appeal rejected against deletion of addition on the share of loss in Auto Ancillary Trust and Tamilnadu Infotech Fund and also made a disallowance under Section 14A by CIT (A) on the reason that clearance from the Committee of disputes was not obtained by the Revenue before filing the appeal - Held that - It is admitted by both sides that getting CoD clearance for filing appeal is no more required in view of the latest decision of in the case of Electronic corporation of India Vs. Union of India and others 2011 (2) TMI 3 - SUPREME COURT . Thus the order passed by the Tribunal is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Tribunal to hear the matter on merits and pass orders in accordance with law - in favour of the revenue.

Summary

Issues Involved:
Appeal against Tribunal's Order on assessment year 2004-2005, Disallowance under Section 14A, Requirement of Committee of Disputes (CoD) clearance for filing appeal.

Analysis:
The case involved an appeal by the revenue against the Tribunal's Order dated 3.3.2010 for the assessment year 2004-2005. The assessing Officer had made additions on the share of loss in Auto Ancillary Trust and Tamilnadu Infotech Fund due to lack of evidence and also made a disallowance under Section 14A. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) had allowed the appeal in favor of the assessee. The revenue then filed an appeal before the Tribunal, which was rejected on the grounds of not obtaining clearance from the Committee of Disputes (CoD) before filing the appeal.

The main issue raised in the appeal was whether the Tribunal was right in dismissing the revenue's appeal due to the absence of CoD clearance, even though the appeal could have been adjudicated on merits. Both sides admitted that as per the latest decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Electronic Corporation of India Vs. Union of India, getting CoD clearance for filing an appeal is no longer required.

In light of the Supreme Court decision, the High Court held that obtaining clearance from the Committee of Disputes was no longer necessary in this case. The Court set aside the Tribunal's order and remitted the matter back to the Tribunal to hear the case on merits and pass orders accordingly. The question of law was answered in favor of the revenue, and the appeal was allowed for the Tribunal to decide the matter on merits.

This judgment clarifies the requirement of CoD clearance for filing appeals and emphasizes that such clearance is no longer mandatory as per the Supreme Court's ruling. It underscores the importance of adjudicating appeals on their merits rather than dismissing them based on procedural grounds.