2015 (6) TMI 812 - HC - Income Tax

Court expunges adverse remarks, stresses judicial restraint & respect in legal proceedings

Madhukar B. Thakoor, Mrs. Sunita Samir Sao Lr. of Balchandra B. Thakoor Versus The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai And Others

The High Court intervened to expunge adverse remarks made by the Tribunal against the assessee and the representative, emphasizing the importance of ... Rectification of mistake - adverse remarks not only against the assessee but against the representative of the assessee - Held that:- Repeatedly, the Hon'ble Supreme Court cautioned the Presiding Officer of the Courts and Tribunals from adversely commenting and remarking on the conduct of parties or their representatives or pleaders. If these comments and remarks, adversely affecting them are not required for the decision of a case and it could be justly and fairly reached on the basis of material produced and the arguments canvassed, then, the Courts and Tribunals should refrain from passing any adverse remarks or making harsh comments on the conduct of the parties. Sobriety and restraint in judicial conduct is of paramount importance. Even if the Presiding Officer, members of the Tribunal are agitated by prolong arguments and often needless, still they must not lose patience and to a extent as to comment upon the conduct of the Advocates or representatives. That must been avoided as it would be a reflection on the working of the Tribunal as a whole. We delete and expunge all the remarks which have been made against the representative and the parties. Thus, passage or lines from the order particularly para 17 shall stand expunged and deleted. This would also include deletion of the direction to pay costs. The imposition thereof is accordingly set aside. Barring this interference and for the limited purpose and by clarifying that all contentions on merits of the application and of the controversy or subject matter thereof are kept open for being considered in the pending appeals, we dispose of this writ petition. Issues:1. Adverse remarks against the assessee and the representative by the Tribunal.2. Judicial conduct and the necessity of restraint in making adverse comments.Analysis:Issue 1: Adverse remarks against the assessee and the representative by the TribunalThe High Court noted that the representative of the assessee, a Chartered Accountant, was subjected to adverse remarks by the Tribunal in paragraph 17 of its order. The representative argued that the adverse remarks were unwarranted, especially considering the nature of the miscellaneous application. The High Court emphasized that passing critical remarks on the conduct of parties or their representatives should be avoided unless absolutely necessary for the decision of the case. Referring to Supreme Court judgments, the High Court highlighted the importance of maintaining sobriety and restraint in judicial conduct. In light of these principles, the High Court expunged all adverse remarks made against the representative and the parties, including the direction to pay costs.Issue 2: Judicial conduct and the necessity of restraint in making adverse commentsThe High Court underscored the significance of judicial restraint and discipline in the administration of justice. Quoting various Supreme Court judgments, the High Court reiterated that derogatory remarks should not be made against individuals unless essential for the case's decision. The court emphasized that judges must exhibit humility and respect towards all parties involved in the legal process. The High Court, in line with these principles, deleted all adverse remarks against the representative and the parties, emphasizing the need for judicial respect and restraint. The High Court clarified that while expunging the remarks, it kept all contentions on the merits of the application open for consideration in the pending appeals.In conclusion, the High Court intervened to expunge adverse remarks made by the Tribunal against the assessee and the representative, emphasizing the importance of judicial restraint and respect in legal proceedings. The judgment serves as a reminder of the judiciary's duty to maintain sobriety and fairness in conduct while upholding the principles of justice and independence.