9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (12) TMI 1216 - HC - Income TaxPetition for recalling of noting in the order sheet - adverse remarks made by the tribunal against the Chartered Accountant (CA) in the order - Held that - it appears that originally, the dispute was between Accountant and Judicial Members of the Tribunal and it was not functioning. So, adjournment was sought by the petitioner, but the same was refused. However, on 06.03.2013, the case of the petitioner was decided in favour of the assessee in his presence. - During the course of arguments, the petitioner has tendered his unconditional apology orally as well as in writing. When the petitioner has tendered his unconditional apology, no further adjudication is required - The order of the Tribunal modified to expunge the reference made by the Tribunal to the Institute of Chartered Accountant of India, and cancelled the cost of Rs.5,000/-, imposed by the Tribunal too. Adverse remark against the petitioner, if any, is also expunged.- Decided in favour of petitioner.
Issues:
Assault on order by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal; Refusal of adjournment leading to decision against the petitioner; Allegations of inappropriate remarks and directions in the impugned order; Dispute between two Members of the ITAT Bench; Request for setting aside the impugned order; Justification of the impugned order by the opposite party; Resolution through the petitioner's unconditional apology; Modification of the impugned order by the High Court. Analysis: The petitioner challenged the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Lucknow, for the assessment year 2005-06, alleging that the refusal of adjournment by the Judicial Member led to a decision against the petitioner in the presence of the petitioner. The petitioner, a practicing Chartered Accountant, sought to recall a notation on the order sheet, which resulted in adverse remarks against the petitioner and a cost imposition of Rs.5,000. The petitioner contended that the remarks and directions in the impugned order were not in line with the dignity of a practicing member of the Bar and against judicial decorum. The High Court noted the dispute between the Accountant and Judicial Members of the Tribunal, leading to the refusal of adjournment and subsequent decision against the petitioner. The petitioner's counsel argued that the impugned order contained remarks and directions that were not appropriate and requested the High Court to set aside the order. The opposite party justified the impugned order, stating it was passed as per the Vice President's direction. The High Court, after hearing both parties, found that the petitioner had tendered an unconditional apology, resolving the matter. Citing the Supreme Court's ruling in M.P. Special Police Establishment vs. State of M.P., the High Court modified the impugned order by expunging the reference to the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India and canceling the imposed cost of Rs.5,000. Any adverse remarks against the petitioner were also expunged to maintain the dignity and decorum of the judicial system. In conclusion, the High Court disposed of the writ petition, emphasizing the importance of upholding the dignity and decorum of the judicial system to prevent such incidents in the future. The High Court's decision to modify the impugned order aimed to ensure justice and fairness while resolving the dispute between the petitioner and the Tribunal, ultimately maintaining the integrity of the judicial process.
|
