9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (4) TMI 84X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... petitioner it was ordered to be listed on April 19, 1996. In view of the fact that the Tribunal itself directed the appeals to be fixed for hearing in the second week of May, 1996, it was thought proper to dispose of the petition finally at the admission stage itself. Since the matter was proposed to be finally disposed of, learned counsel for the petitioner was directed to supply a copy of the petition to Mr. G. S. Bapna, standing counsel for the Revenue, in order to give opportunity to the Revenue to oppose the writ petition. Mr. N. M. Ranka, learned counsel for the petitioner, made a statement in court that Mr. G. S. Bapna who was earlier counsel for the Revenue has resigned. It was stated that in his place, Mr. Virendra Dangi has been appointed and as such, learned counsel for the petitioner was directed to approach Mr. Virendra Dangi who too informed learned counsel for the petitioner that he had also resigned. It is unfortunate that there is no standing counsel to represent the Revenue at Jaipur Bench in cases filed against the Revenue. In view of the said fact, the court is left with no option but to proceed to decide the case on the basis of the submissions made on behalf o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeal with costs. The executor, Shri Mahendra Singh, son of His late Highness Maharana Shri Bhagwat Singhji, preferred a special leave petition being S. L. P. (Civil) No. 10313 of 1993 before the apex court against the order dated May 12, 1993, passed by the Division Bench of this court rejecting the appeal filed by Rajmata Sushila Kumari and others. Consequently, the said special leave petition was also dismissed by the apex court on May 9, 1994. It appears that the District Judge, Udaipur, passed an order dated December 2, 1995 [?], on the civil suits filed by Shri Mahendra Singh and others against which miscellaneous appeals were filed by Shri Mahendra Singh and others in this court. The said appeals were disposed of by this court on June 11, 1993, and directions issued by this court in the aforesaid appeals were as under : "It is directed that Shri Arvind Singh shall render true and correct account of the suit properties, i.e., immovable and movable properties, which are in his possession, management and control. He should also render the true and correct account of the income arising out of these properties since 1983 and onwards. It is further directed that Shri Arvind Si ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ,50,24,227. An appeal was again filed and the appellate authority allowed the appeal in part vide order dated December 6, 1993. The taxable estate was recomputed at Rs. 1,16,78,140 and the estate duty was determined at Rs. 88,91,419. Three appeals were filed before the Tribunal, one by the elder son of the late Maharana, Shri Mahendra Singhji, the second by the younger son, Shri Arvind Singhji, and the third by the Revenue. The Tribunal consolidated all the appeals of all the accountable persons. The matter was, therefore, again heard by the appellate authority under the Estate Duty Act and as per the appellate order dated November 22, 1995, the taxable estate of the late Maharana has been valued at Rs. 1,42,55,498. An amount of Rs. 1,17,72,287 has been determined as the estate duty payable under the Estate Duty Act. A sum of Rs. 23,13,249 is said to have been paid so far. Similarly, the assessment proceedings under the Wealth-tax Act were also initiated against the petitioner for the assessment years 1985-86 to 1990-91 and 1992-93 which culminated in filing seven appeals before the Income-tax Tribunal which are pending. Two stay applications were filed before the Income-tax Tribun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itioner that the petitioner has only been performing the duties as trustee of the properties including movable or immovable which are under the control of the court. It was further submitted that in view of the said fact the petitioner is unable to arrange funds. So far as the interest of the Revenue is concerned, the same is fully secured as the property is in custodia legis. From the perusal of the impugned order it is abundantly clear that this fact is not disputed that all the assets continue to be under the control and supervision of the District Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently urged that the Tribunal has not assigned any reason as to why only 75 per cent. of the impugned tax should be stayed and the petitioner may be forced to deposit 25 per cent. of the impugned tax before the appeals are heard. The submission raised on behalf of the petitioner appears to have sufficient force. The perusal of the order passed by the Tribunal does indicate that the Tribunal was fully conscious of the economic stringencies faced by the petitioner which appealed to the conscience of the Tribunal for staying 75 per cent. of the impugned tax, but it does not stand to reason t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rial regarding the financial status of the petitioner was placed before the Tribunal to establish that the petitioner was in a position to deposit 25 per cent. of the impugned tax. The main plea of the learned counsel for the Revenue before the Tribunal was that the remedies available to the petitioners have not been fully exhausted, therefore, stay applications were premature and should be rejected on that score alone, but the said plea did not find favour with the Tribunal and the Tribunal was of the view that the stay applications filed before the Tribunal were maintainable. The aforesaid submission, in my view, has sufficient force and deserves to be accepted. In view of the facts stated above, learned counsel for the petitioner urged that the impugned order passed by the Tribunal directing the petitioner to deposit 25 per cent. of the impugned tax is arbitrary, erroneous, based on conjectures and surmises and cannot be sustained in the eyes of law. The next and most important limb of the argument of learned counsel for the petitioner is that in view of Instruction No. 96 (F. No. 1/6/69(ITCC)), dated August 21, 1969, the recovery of the total amount should have been stayed. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rt and it was held that the Appellate Tribunal was justified in giving effect to the circular and that no error was committed by the Income-tax Officer in the assessment order passed by him in the matter of allowing extra shift allowance on the entire machinery. The next case on which counsel placed reliance is the decision of this court rendered by the Division Bench consisting the then Chief justice J. S. Verma and M. C. Jain J., in the case of CWT v. Sanwarmal Shivkumar [1988] 171 ITR 377. The Division Bench has held that the income-tax as well as the Wealth-tax Departments are bound to follow the circular issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. Counsel also places reliance on the judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court rendered by the Division Bench in the case of Jaikishan Gopikishan and Sons v. CIT [1989] 178 ITR 481, in which it was held that the circulars issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes are binding on all the officers of the Income-tax Department. Benevolent circulars are in the nature of administrative relief and they assist the assessee. Not only this, learned counsel contended that even if the circulars are placed before the High Court for the first ti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on No. 96 dated August 21, 1969, has already been quoted hereinabove. Learned counsel for the petitioner further placed reliance on a judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court rendered by a Division Bench in the case of Sat Pal v. ITAT [1996] 217 ITR 317 wherein, it was held by the Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court that pending disposal of the appeal, the recovery of the impugned tax must remain stayed. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that though the said case was cited before the Tribunal, the Tribunal committed an error in not relying on the same. He further contended that though the Tribunal has mentioned in its judgment about the said decision, it has not given any reason as to why the said decision of the Punjab and Haryana High Court is not applicable in the facts of the case. The relevant portion of the order of the Tribunal, reads as under : "The Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Sat Pal [1996] 217 ITR 317 has observed that where the appeal of the petitioner was pending before the Appellate Tribunal, recovery of penalty must be stayed." A perusal of the aforesaid portion of the order of the Tribunal indicates that the Tribun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
