TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (4) TMI 1251
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....umstances of the case and in law, the ITAT was justified in holding that interest received by the assessee, out of funds placed with its HO and other overseas branches, is not taxable in India ? (2) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT was justified in holding that interest payable by the Indian branch / permanent establishment of the foreign bank to its head office and other overseas branches, is deductible in computing the total income ? (3) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT was justified in holding that provisions of section 40(a)(i) are not applicable on interest payable by the Indian branch / permanent establishment of the foreign bank to its head office and other overseas branches, as it does not give rise to any income although as per the deeming provisions of article 7 of the concerned DTAA the income of the branch is to be computed as a separate and a distinct identity from the main entity and for the computation of income the provisions of domestic law are applicable ? (4) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT was right in not deciding the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... appeal is, therefore, dismissed on question No.4. 6. As far as question No.5 is concerned, we find the factual situation the backdrop of which this question is raised to be most unfortunate, disturbing and dangerous to say the least. The Tribunal as a matter of routine goes on consolidating appeals. Possibly the parties before the Tribunal feel that until there is a pile-up of the cases they need not be decided. Meaning thereby, if the same assessee and year after year raises the same questions and issues because of the findings of the assessing officer then, so long as there is no substantial prejudice to the interest of the revenue, these appeals need not been taken up periodically but can wait final outcome till some 8 or 9 appeals and for successive assessment years are lodged and registered. The Tribunal then can decide them and possibly by a common order. It is on such understanding of parties, their agreement and consent that the Tribunal keeps these appeals pending and that is how we have unfortunately and with great pain and anguish used the word "pile-up". When they are eventually taken up for decision, naturally by passage of time, it is not possible for the represen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... and earlier is not clear from these two paragraphs. However, the revenue has clearly conceded the position before the Tribunal. It must, therefore, suffer for having consented to the state of affairs and brought about by the Tribunal's orders and directions noted and reproduced above. We do not see the anxiety of the parties and the Tribunal in consolidating matters and appeals. The power to consolidate Appeals is a power implicit and inherent in a power to decide and adjudicate them. If you have to render a judgment repeatedly on similar issues and which must be clearly indicated in your decision, meaning thereby reasons and conclusions, then, to avoid conflicting directions and orders often cases and appeals are consolidated. If they involve common questions, common arguments, they can be conveniently disposed of by a common order. Then, we can understand a consolidation. If the matters are factual but similar or identical, then, as well we can understand the Court or Tribunal consolidating appeals. However, there is no justification for consolidating matters and by keeping the earlier case pending till further appeals accumulate for subsequent years raising the same issues ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rt flowing from Section 151 of the CPC. Unless specifically prohibited, the Civil Court has inherent power to make such orders as may be necessary for the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of the process of the Court. Consolidation of suits is ordered for meeting the ends of justice as it saves the parties from multiplicity of proceedings, delay and expenses. Complete or even substantial and sufficient similarity of the issues arising for decision in two suits enables the two suits being consolidated for trial and decision. The parties are relieved of the need of adducing the same or similar documentary and oral evidence twice over in the two suits at two different trials. The evidence having been recorded, common arguments need be addressed followed by one common judgment. However, as the suits are two, the Court may, based on the common judgment, draw two different decrees or one common decree to be placed on the record of the two suits." 8. We find that despite all this, we cannot entertain this appeal on question No.5 because it is the revenue which is equally to be blamed for the state of affairs and prevailing in the Tribunal. On finding that the issue has been decided p....