2013 (11) TMI 432

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....-Appeal No. GOA/CEX/GSK/30/2012, dated 20-4-2012, the Assistant Commissioner, had the temerity to deliberately commit judicial indiscipline, on the specious ground that the Department has filed an Appeal before CESTAT. 2. After a perusal of the case records, it is evident that the Assistant Commissioner has blatantly disregarded the decision of her immediate Superior Authority - Joint Commissioner and thereafter, the upholding of the said decision by the 1st Appellate Authority i.e. the Commissioner Appeals. Decision rendered by two separate higher forums have been deliberately flouted. The propriety and wisdom of such conduct by a quasi-judicial officer has been adversely commented upon by the Hon'ble Apex Court in "Union of India ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....due harassment to assessees and chaos in administration of tax laws. [para 6]" 3. In the instant case, the Assistant Commissioner is consciously aware, that on the same subject matter, for the same Appellant, two forums have resolved the issue by holding identical views. The mere filing of an Appeal before the next higher forum will not tantamount to a Stay on those decisions. The Assistant Commissioner, vide Para 14 of the impugned order, has construed that, mere filing of an Appeal, empowers her to entertain a different view. Such an approach will cause utter chaos and detriment to the administration of justice. The correct course for her was to transfer the case to Call-Book and await the decision of the Hon'ble CESTAT on the App....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... SUPREME COURT Manila EN BANC Adm. Matter No. MTJ-92-655, March 8, 1993. LICERIO P. NIQUE, complainant, v. JUDGE FELIPE G. ZAPATOS, respondent. Ruben B. Baldoza for complainant. SYLLABUS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS; EXECUTION OF A FINAL JUDGMENT, MINISTERIAL DUTY OF THE TRIAL COURT; A COURT LOWER IN RANK OWES RESPECT AND IS BOUND BY THE DECISION OF AN APPELLATE COURT. - Respondent Judge ought to know his place in the judicial ladder. Occupying as he does a court that is lower in rank than the RTC, he owes respect to the latter and is bound by the disposition or decision of said appellate court upon a petition for review of an order/orders issued by him. His act of "reversing" the final judgment of the RTC, instead of comp....