Commissioner of Income Tax-4 vs Hindustan Organics Chemicals Ltd.

On 29 June 2015, we had passed an order pointing out that the impugned order of the Tribunal dismissed the revenue''s appeal before it for the Assessment Year 2008-09 by following its own order in respect of respondent-assessee itself for the Assessment Year 2007-08.

The above order was passed after perusal of the affidavit dated 29 June 2015 filed by one Mr. Virender Singh, Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax. In the affidavit dated 29 June 2011 Mr. Singh states that the revenue''s appeal for the Assessment Year 2007-08 was dismissed for non removal of office objections as far back as on 29 November 2012. The affidavit further states that the revenue was not aware about the dismissal of the appeal and it was only on the direction of this Court on 10 June 2015 seeking the status of the appeal for the Assessment Year 2007-08 that he became aware of the dismissal. The affidavit states that there is nothing on record to indicate that his office was informed that the appeal for the Assessment Year 2007-08 was dismissed for non removal of office objections.

However we found that at page 9 of the present appeal memo in bold which the appellant has not even bothered to remove makes the following observations:

"Remark: Please incorporate the present status of the appeals in assessee''s own case for A.Y. 2006-07 and 2007-08."

This appeal memo was authorized and signed by the Commissioner of Income Tax and also verified and declared by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax. The present appeal was filed on 17 May 2013 containing the above remarks in bold. The officers were fully aware that the appeal for the Assessment Year 2007-08 had been dismissed on 29 November 2012. Remedial measures could have been taken then i.e. at time of filing the present appeal in 2013.

We had also recorded our observation that many appeals are being filed by the revenue in this Court which stand concluded by earlier decisions of the Tribunal from which no appeals have been filed by revenue. Thus appeals are filed to this Court mechanically, without due application of mind. It was in the aforesaid circumstances that we were constrained to direct that a senior officer of the revenue take notice of the facts recorded in our order dated 29 June 2015 and take steps to ensure that the law is equally applied in all cases, besides ensuring that the officers of the revenue concerned keep themselves engaged in the proceedings before the Court till such time as the Court finally disposes of the appeal or writ, as the case may be.

Today, the Counsel appearing for the revenue invites our attention to the affidavit dated 5 August 2015 filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Judicial). The affidavit sets out the steps being taken by the revenue to ensure that proper care is taken in respect of filing of appeals on behalf of the revenue to this Court and it incidentally also mentions that the appeal for the Assessment Year 2007-08 which was dismissed on 29 November 2012 is being sought to be restored by filing Notice of Motion dated 6 July 2015. The affidavit as filed does not deal with the sorry state of affairs in this appeal and in respect of appeal for the Assessment Year 2007-08. It does not indicate any steps being taken by the revenue to fix responsibilities in respect of the persons responsible for the state of affairs in the present appeal and also for the dismissal of the appeal for the earlier Assessment Year 2007-08 on 29 November 2012. This fixing of responsibility on officers of the revenue is necessary, particularly when in court matters their attitude is casual and at times downright careless, as in this case. We are of the view that unless the officers of the revenue act with some responsibility, the pending appeals in the Court would keep on increasing, as the appeals are filed most casually even in respect of the issues which are otherwise concluded. However the affidavit dated 5 August 2015 is silent on the issue of fixing responsibility for the mistakes in the present appeal as well as the appeal for the Assessment Year 2007-08.

We wish to point out that not only the Commissioner of Income Tax who signed the present appeal memo and the Assessing Officer who verified the appeal memo have been less than careful. However to compound matters, we find that the affidavit of Mr. Singh dated 29 June 2015 states that there is nothing on the record that revenue was aware of the dismissal of the appeal for the Assessment Year 2008-09 till 10 June 2015. This is a serious lapse as it is incorrect. As the remark in bold in the present appeal clearly shows that the revenue was aware of the appeal for the Assessment Year 2007-08. Filing misleading affidavits in Court cannot be taken lightly and may warrant stringent action. Before we proceed to take any action, we would want to know what steps/action is the revenue taking against such officers.

With the above observations, we adjourn the hearing of this appeal to 25 August 2015. Appeal to be on board on 25 August 2015 under the caption ''For Direction''.