Disposal of appeal by High Court by merely saying that case was not a fit case to be interfered with is not proper; High Court must discuss issues raised by parties and dispose of matter with a reasoned order

[2013] 30 taxmann.com 8 (SC)

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Commissioner of Central Excise, Allahabad

v.

U.P. State Sugar Corpn. Ltd.*

RULES OF INTERPRETAITON

Interpretation of Statutes – Importance of Subject:

For understanding the provisions of a statute, knowledge to apply the ‘correct’ interpretation, is an essential pre-requisite.

In the case of taxing statutes, as in different type of statutes, there are certain bedrock principles on which the interpretation or construction of the particular statute is done by the Courts and Tribunals; and the tax practitioners are required to have the knowledge of these basics in their catalogue to understand the statute and implications of its provisions. Some important aspects relating to‘Interpretation’ of Taxing Statutes are dealt herein.

Revenue Authorities of State can not refuse to follow the jurisdictional HIgh Court on the Grounds that matter of some other HIgh Court is pending before the Supreme Court

GM Mittal Stainless Steel P Ltd 263 ITR 255 (SC)

Disposal of appeal by High Court by merely saying that case was not a fit case to be interfered with is not proper; High Court must discuss issues raised by parties and dispose of matter with a reasoned order

[2013] 30 taxmann.com 8 (SC)

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Commissioner of Central Excise, Allahabad

v.

U.P. State Sugar Corpn. Ltd.*

26-08-2011

Decision of Coordinate Bench of ITAT when no contrary decision of Bench itself is binding on the ITAT Bench hearing the case

ITA 357/(ASR)/2010 ACIT vs S.S. Embroiders

SLP filed against decision of High Court

SLP filed against decision of High Court even if admitted by SC is of no avail unless order of High Court is stayed by SC
ITA (Asr)/65/2010 dated Vinod Jain c/o VK Metals and ITA 68/2010 Balaji Rosins (SB) 26-10-2012

After filing appeal before CIT A,assesee has no right to withdraw it

High Court of Madras in case of M. Loganathan ITA 361/2006 dated 18-07-2012
Followed CIT v. Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria [1967] 66 ITR 443 wherein the Apex Court held that when an assessee takes the assessment on appeal, he cannot withdraw the same. Thus, when the machinery of the Act has been activated, the assessee cannot prevent the appellate authority from settling the real income to be assessee. 

Department can not take advantage of its own inaction

Orrisa High Court in case of Managing Committee CFH scheme 3-07-2012

a certificate ought to have been given to the petitioner during the financial year 2009-10 and the Department cannot take advantage of its own inaction and lapses by taking a stand that the financial year is over. Such action of the opposite parties as rightly apprehended by the petitioner would lead to unnecessary complication and unavoidable and inappropriate proceedings. Had the certificate been given in time as was done in the previous year there would not have been any necessity for making any deduction of tax by some of the principals from the payments made to the petitioner and the ultimate consequence, because of Departmentalinaction, the Assessee-petitioner has to again go through the process of seeking refund in its assessment.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in M/s. Dabur India Ltd. and another v. State of Uttar Pradesh and others. AIR 1990 SC 1814, observed that Government, Central or State, cannot be permitted to play dirty games with the citizens of this country to coerce them in making payments which the citizens were not legally obliged to make. If any money is due to the Government, the Government should take appropriate steps, but it should not take extra legal steps or adopt the course of manoeuvring. Because of the above discontentment expressed at the Bar, it has become necessary to provide guidelines for just exercise of the power of Revenue authorities. To prevent the abuse of power and to see that it does not become a new despotism, courts are gradually evolving the principles to be observed by the authorities while exercising such power. New problems call for new solutions.

Tribunal is bound by its earlier decision

The Tribunal is bound by its earlier decision where neither Tribunal has any reason nor the applicant in the ground of revision has brought any new point which requires reversal of eralier decision

Ram Murti Gupta and Sons 1992 P&H Taxes 366 (Pb Tri)

Supreme Court Judgement is precedent for question of lawlaw

Supreme Court judgement is precedent for quaestion of law only and for an order requiring reinstatement of employee without assigning reasons
Surinder Kumar and Ors 194 ITR 434 SC

Supreme Court Judgement even if doubted by another bench to be applied unless declared bad by another bench

Johnson Lifts Ltd 10 STM 864 HC-AP

Judges found to follow decision of co-ordinate bench

If Judges do not agree with decision of coordinate bench the matter must be referred to larger bench otherwise decision of coordinate bench must be followed

1.Sunder Das Kanahaya Lal Bhatija 77 STC 347(SC)
2. Devki Ammal 212 ITR 395