2017 (4) TMI 105 - HC - Income Tax

Vladity of AO order of Reopening of assessment - A.O inspite of the order proceeded with the matter to dispose off cases prior to prescribed date passed the order under section 143(3) read with section 147 and 254 - Held that - The question is not of availability of appeal against the impugned orders. The issue is that once this Court after considering the rival contentions directed the Tribunal to deal with the issue afresh, there was no reason for the A.O to proceed with the matters of same Assessment year even in the background of referring to the order passed by this Court in the four Tax Appeals. A copy of this Court s order was placed and was available with the record of the A.O. It is reflected in para 1.9 of the impugned order. We are inclined to dispose of these writ petitions on the sole ground as specific directions have been issued to the Tribunal to decide the appeals afresh. The impugned order passed by the A.O inspite of the order passed by the High Court in our view is unsustainable. There is no question even accepting the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the Department that the petitioner has remedy available against it. This is also for the reason that once the High Court has passed the order directing the Tribunal to decide the appeals afresh, it is required to be followed by all concerned, apart from would be conflict and/or difficulty in passing any order by the Tribunal and/or by the other authority.

Summary

Issues:
Petition to quash and set aside separate assessment orders for A.Y. 2009-10 and 2010-11 and halt tax recovery based on said orders.

Analysis:
The High Court heard the parties and decided to dispose of the writ petitions through a common order as the issues and submissions were common. The petitioner sought to quash and set aside separate assessment orders for A.Y. 2009-10 and 2010-11 and halt tax recovery based on those orders. The Senior Counsel for the petitioner referred to a previous order passed by the Court in Tax Appeal Nos. 79, 80, 81, and 82 of 2015, which directed the Tribunal to decide the appeals afresh after considering the parties' contentions. Despite this order, the Assessing Officer proceeded to dispose of the cases and issued demand notices for the assessed tax amount. The Court noted that the Assessing Officer's actions were unwarranted, as specific directions had been issued to the Tribunal to decide the appeals afresh. The Court emphasized that the Assessing Officer's order, in defiance of the High Court's directive, was unsustainable.

The Court clarified that the issue was not the availability of an appeal against the impugned orders but the Assessing Officer's disregard for the Court's directions to the Tribunal. The Court held that once specific directions had been issued by the High Court, they must be followed by all concerned parties to avoid conflicts and difficulties in passing further orders. The Court, therefore, quashed and set aside the impugned orders passed by the Assessing Officer and directed the Tribunal to deal with the appeals in accordance with the law. The Court left all contentions open for the parties and did not award any costs in this matter.