AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2005 (12) TMI 364
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r Section 129A of the Customs Act. The appeals were heard by the West Zonal Bench of the Tribunal at Mumbai and two opinions were expressed by the Members of the Bench who heard the appeals - while the Member (Technical) held that the appeals were required to be rejected, the Vice-President held that the appeals were required to be allowed. Due to the difference of opinion, the following question was formulated and placed before the Hon'ble President of the Tribunal for reference to third Member for resolving the difference :- "Whether the appeals are required to be rejected as held by Member (Technical) OR whether the appeals are required to be allowed as held by Vice-President." 2. Pursuant to the above, the Hon'ble President r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ence between the Members of the Bench who heard the appeal has/have not been clearly enumerated as required under the Section. They cited the following decisions in support of their contention that only the point of difference or points of difference can be referred to a third Member and not the entire case :- (1) AIR 1933 Allahabad 861 (2) 1953 (23) ITR 505 (Patna) (3) 1999 (240) ITR 189 (Kar.) (4) AIR 1958 M.P. 380 (5) AIR 1992 Allahabad 151 (6) AIR 1993 Del. 316, and (7) 2004 (174) E.L.T. 213 5. Learned Senior Counsel for the applicants submits....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... only decide the point or points which have been referred to and can neither formulate a new point or direct the Members of the referring Bench to act in a particular manner or to re-decide the particular point is a settled position of law, in the present case it is to be noted that a clear finding has been recorded on every issue arising for determination in the appeals (of which the present applicant was one of the appellants), in paragraph 25 of the order recorded by Member (Technical). He has held that - (a) the goods have been overvalued; (b) therefore, they are liable to confiscation under Section 113(d) of the Customs Act; (c) as a consequence thereof, p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....answering the question stating that the matter be referred to a Larger Bench rather than to a third member for resolution. The decision of the Hon'ble Patna High Court in Hanutram Chandanmul v. CIT, Bihar and Orissa - 1953 (23) ITR 505 cited by the learned Senior Counsel, is also distinguishable on facts. In that case, the Judicial Member of the ITAT was of the opinion that the Income-tax Officer was right in applying proviso to Section 13 of the Income-tax Act and adding a sum of Rs. 12,800/- to the income of the assessee as disclosed by the books, while the Accountant Member was of the opinion that an addition of Rs. 2,800/- would more than adequately cover the requirements of the case. This is how the case was referred to the Presiden....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....have been referred to third Member, but only the point of difference as to whether the appeals merited rejection in the light of the view recorded by Member (Technical) or the appeals merited acceptance in the order recorded by Vice-President. In the case of Amar Pal Singh v. Election Commission of India - AIR 1993 Del. 316, the Writ Petition was originally heard by a Division Bench. The presiding Judge held that the objection was maintainable and also decided the case on merits whereas the other Judge held that the objection was not maintainable and consequently there was no occasion for him to decide the case on merits. After pronouncement of the judgments, the following order was passed by the Bench :- "In view of the difference of....