Judicial discipline bars contrary assessment action where an appellate tribunal ruling on the same tax issue remains in force.

Judicial discipline requires a revenue assessing authority to follow an existing appellate tribunal order on the same controversy, even where the State has filed pending revisions. Where the tribunal has decided the issue in favour of the assessees, the assessing authority should not continue with assessment or issue pre-assessment notices contrary to that decision unless the order is stayed or set aside. In the charter party context involving alleged transfer of the right to use goods, the proper course is to await the outcome of the pending revisions before taking further departmental action on the same issue.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessing authority could proceed with assessment or pre-assessment notices when the same controversy had already been decided in favour of the assessees by the appellate tribunal and the State's revisions against that tribunal order were still pending.

Analysis: The dispute arose from charter party transactions said to attract tax on transfer of the right to use goods. The Court noted that the tribunal had earlier decided the identical issue in favour of the assessees and that the State had carried the matter in revisions which were yet to be decided. Relying on the principle of judicial discipline and the binding effect of orders of superior appellate authorities, the Court held that the assessing authority could not ignore the tribunal's order merely because the State had filed revisions. The appropriate course was to await the outcome of the pending revisions before taking further action on the same issue.

Conclusion: The respondent was directed not to proceed with the impugned assessment order or pre-assessment notices until the pending tax case revisions were decided, after which action could be taken in accordance with law.

Final Conclusion: The writ petitions succeeded to the limited extent of obtaining a restraint on further departmental action pending final determination of the connected revisions; the merits of taxability were not finally decided in these proceedings.

Ratio Decidendi: A lower revenue authority must obey an existing appellate order on the same issue and cannot proceed contrary to it while the higher challenge remains pending, unless and until that order is stayed or set aside.

---