9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (2) TMI 536X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fect to the order of the appellate authority by the decision of which, the issue has been finally settled. The refusal or failure to comply the order of the higher/appellate authority by the lower authority amounts to contempt of court which may invite penal action under the Contempt of courts Act as well under the other relevant provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Apart from which such a conduct shows the unwillingness of the lower rank officer to comply the directions of his superiors which may invite departmental action. - Decided against revenue. - ITA No.1987/Mum/2011 - - - Dated:- 4-2-2015 - Shri Rajendra Shri Sanjay Garg, JJ. For the Appellant : Shri Akhilendra Yadav For the Respondent : Shri Niraj Punmiya ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rlier order on 30.12.2010 in which she directed the AO to follow the ITAT order dated 08.12.2010 while giving effect to her order. 5. Department went in appeal to the ITAT against the order of Ld. CIT(A) dated 30.12.2010. The appeal (ITA 1987.Mum/2011) was filed on 10.03.2011 6. ITAT in order dated 08.12.2010 confirmed the disallowance u/s. 14A to ₹ 50000/- (as had been originally done by the AO). It did not make any comment on the enhancement made due to direction given by Ld. CIT(A) for making disallowance as per Rule 8D. It dismissed the ground. 7. The Department had gone in appeal to the Hon ble Bombay High Court against the order of ITAT. However, the Department did not take up this issue in the appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... action. 4. In the case in hand, the AO failed to give effect to the order of the Tribunal. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) directed the AO to give effect to the order of the Tribunal which has attained finality. Shockingly, the AO, instead of complying the order of the Ld. CIT(A) directing him to give effect to the order of the Tribunal, proceeded to file the appeal against the said direction. More shockingly, the concerned Commissioner of Income Tax-11 (Admin) Mumbai, not only authorized but directed vide his letter dated 9.3.2011 to the AO to file appeal against the said directions of the Ld. CIT(A) vide which he [CIT(A)] had directed the AO to comply with the decision/ order of the T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... trongly disapproved the irresponsible attitude of the officers in not applying their mind while approving for the filing of the appeals, which benefits no one and rather defeats larger public interest. The Hon ble High Court taking strong note of such an act has imposed cost of ₹ 50,000/- upon the Revenue. In another case CIT vs. M/s. Kishan Ratilal Choksey Share Securities Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No.1001 of 2011 decided on 17th April, 2014 the Hon ble High Court strongly discouraged the attitude of the Revenue for filing appeals on the issues which have already been settled and decided in the appeals pertaining to prior assessment years in the case of the very assessee. The Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of UOI and Others vs. Kam ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e orders of their higher judicial authorities. However it was directed by the Tribunal that the officers, in their zeal to protect the interest of the department should not go to the extent of committing judicial indiscipline. A copy of the said order in the case of Veena Developers (supra) was directed to be sent to the Chairman of the CBDT so that the necessary instructions may be issued to the Income Tax officers/Commissioners in this regard and in future due care be taken, not to disrespect or disobey the orders of the higher judicial authorities and also not to file frivolous appeals. 6. The present case is also an example of the fact that there is a lack of proper knowledge/guidance to the revenue officials about the judicial hie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
