Commissioner of Income-Tax vs Kisan Ratilal Choksey Share and Securities Pvt. Ltd.

The present appeal challenges the order passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai Bench, in Income Tax Appeal No. 4821/Mum/2009, dated September 30, 2010. The assessment year in question is 2006-07. The Tribunal has categorically observed that in disposing of the Revenue''s appeal and equally that of the assessee''s what it has done is to follow its own view taken earlier and in the case of the very assessee. The assessee''s own case, namely, Income Tax Appeal No. 4347/M/2009 has been referred to. The assessment year in that case was 2005-06. The Tribunal delivered an order dated June 14, 2010, and dealt with an identical controversy. The two substantial questions of law and which are placed for our consideration were the very questions raised by the Revenue. The Revenue filed the appeal against the order dated June 4, 2010, being Income Tax Appeal No. 6803 of 2010. On October 21, 2011, the Revenue''s appeal has been dismissed by this court with the following observations and conclusions:

"Counsel for the Revenue states that the questions raised by the Revenue in this appeal are covered against the Revenue by the judgment of this court in the case of The Commissioner of Income Tax-4(3), Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai - 40020 Vs. M/s. Kotak Securities Limited, 1st Floor, Bakthawar 229, Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400021, , the decision in the case of the ITO v. Angel Capital and Debit Market Ltd. (Income Tax Appeal (L.) No. 475 of 2011) decided on July 28, 2011, and the decision in the case of the CIT v. Sykes and Ray Equities (I) Ltd. (Income Tax Appeal No. 3563 of 2010) decided on October 14, 2011. For the reasons stated in the aforesaid orders, the present appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs."

In doing so, the Division Bench comprising their Lordships, the hon''ble Justice Mr. J.P. Devdhar, as his Lordship then was, and the hon''ble Mr. Justice A. A. Sayed followed their own order dated July 21, 2011, in Income Tax (L.) No. 475 of 2011.

When the present appeal was called out for admission today, it was the assessee''s counsel who brought to our notice the orders in Income Tax Appeal No. 6803 of 2010, Income Tax Appeal (Lodging) No. 475 of 2011 and Income Tax Appeal No. 3563 of 2010.

It is unfortunate that the Revenue insists in arguing appeals in this manner and for subsequent assessment years. The Revenue ought to have been fair and brought to the notice of this court the fact that its appeal challenging the very findings and conclusions for prior assessment years has been dismissed by this court on the merits. The reasons assigned ought to have been pointed out to us and, thereafter, any explanation should have been offered for admission of this appeal. In the light of the fact that the controversy is fully covered by the orders referred above and particularly the findings rendered by the Division Bench in the very assessee''s case that we are of the opinion that the present appeal does not raise any substantial question of law. It is a gross abuse of the process of this court. It is dismissed with costs quantified at Rs. 1,00,000 (rupees one lakh). Costs be paid to the assessee within 4 (four) weeks from today.

April 17, 2014

This matter was mentioned on a precise later on by Mr. Pinto, learned counsel appearing for the Revenue, and the only request is that the direction to pay the costs quantified at Rs. 1 lakh within four weeks to the assessee be recalled. Mr. Pinto assures the court that hereafter the judicial orders and directions would be abided by in all matters and if appropriate averments are not made, they would be incorporated and inserted to the effect that the orders of the Tribunal for prior assessment years and in the case of the very assessee have been either challenged or otherwise. If the challenge is pending even that statement would also be made. If it is decided, the outcome thereof be also indicated. The relevant explanation then would find place in each and every memo of appeal which is filed in this court and equally to be lodged and filed in the court. It is with this assurance from the Revenue and since the matter is left by the assessee''s counsel to the court that we recall our direction to pay costs quantified at Rs. 1 lakh. No other correction or alteration is made. The application for recall/speaking to the minutes is, accordingly, disposed of. No costs.