TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (5) TMI 627
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the matter concerning "issue" of notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act. (b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the notice under Section 148 of Income Tax Act, as also the Sanction, authorizing the issuance of such notice, both even dated 31.03.2021; and the connected proceeding for reassessment of Income for A.Y. 2013-14. (c) That, this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari, quashing the impugned order of Assessment for A.Y. 2013-14 , dated 29.03.2022, bearing DIN ITBA/AST/S/147/2021- 22/1041898744(1), passed by Assessing Officer." 4. On 18.04.2022, this writ petition was heard at length and following order was passed. 1. Heard Shri Abhinav Mehrotra, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Gaurav Mahajan, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondent nos. 2, 3 and 4 and Shri Arvind Kumar Goswami, learned Central Government Standing Counsel for the respondent no. 1. 2. This writ petition has been filed praying for the following relief: "(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dt. 19.03.2002 passed by the respondent revenue r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y and law. 6.Apart from above, the impugned order, prima facie, appears to be misleading inasmuch as in the impugned order, the respondent no. 4 has deliberately not disclosed 'sent time stamp' reports which is always available with the department. That apart, as per reports being filed before this Court by means of counter affidavits and to be precise in Writ Tax No. 211 of 2022, there is 'Income Tax Business Application Technical Team' which used to give the date and time of (i) generation of notice, (ii) digital signing in ITBA by AO, and (iii) triggering of e-mail. These details are also totally lacking in the impugned order. 7. Under the circumstances, we direct the respondent no. 4 to file a personal affidavit of an officer of the Centre not below the rank of Additional Commissioner of Income Tax to explain the things as noted above and file copies of 'sent time stamp' and reports of Income Tax Business Application Technical Team, within three days. 8. Put up as a fresh case on 21.4.2022 at 10:00 AM. (emphasis supplied by us) 5. On 21.04.2022, matter was again heard and following order was passed, as under"- "1. Heard learned counsels for the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e of the technical information about date and stamp of issue of notice, dispatch of notice or service of notice. The FAO receives a digitally maintained Order Sheet which automatically got generated on the date of issuance of the notice u/s 148 of the Act. The digitally generated order sheet mentions the date wise, actions/descriptions, from user to user, remarks etc. A photocopy of the order sheet maintained digitally is enclosed herewith and marked as Annexure No. SCA-1. 6. That the information available with FAO was that the notice under 148 of the Act was issued by Jurisdictional assessing Officer on 31-03-2021 and that the notice u/s 148 was placed on the e filing portal of the assessee on 31-03-2021. The rest of information with regard to issuance of notice is now provided by the ITBA /JAO in response to the High Court Order vide his email dated 23-04-22 sent to office of the deponent. 7. That in the present case the Technical Team of ITBA provided the following details to the JAO through email on 22.04.2022 and the same was also shared with the office of the deponent. The reply received from the Technical Team of ITBA is as follows :- Date & time of Generation of Notic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Income Tax Act, 1961 are in issue, and, importantly, those notices are being issued by e-mail, it is directed that the respondent no. 1 shall ensure that the date and time of triggering of e-mail for issuing notices and orders are reflected in the online portal relating to the concerned assessees. 10. Facts of the case as discussed above, particularly the observations made by the respondent no.4 in the last line of the impugned order dated 19.03.2022 noticed by us in our order dated 18.04.2022 quoted in paragraph 4 above clearly indicates that the order dated 19.02.2022 has been passed by the respondents in breach of judicial discipline and propriety causing harassment to the petitioner/assessee on account of the failure to give effect to the order of this Court dated 10.03.2022 in Writ Tax No. 171 of 2022 which was filed by the petitioner. We propose to comment on the conduct of the officer concerned but the respondents have tendered unconditional apology by filing a short counter affidavit dated 22.04.2022, as noted in para 7 above, therefore, in view of the unconditional apology tendered by the deponent Sri Pawan Kumar Sharma, Additional Commissioner of Income Tax in the afores....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....onable phrase - and is the subject matter of an appeal can furnish no ground for not following it unless its operation has been suspended by a competent court. If this healthy rule is not followed, the result will only be undue harassment to assessees and chaos in administration of tax laws." (Emphasis supplied by us) 12. In the case of Official Liquidator Versus Dayanand & Ors. (2008) 10 SCC (para 90) Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that "....it must be remembered that predictability and certainty is an important hallmark of judicial jurisprudence developed in this country in last six decades...." 13. In the case of Kishore Samrite versus State of U.P. and others 2013 (2) SCC 398 (para 29), Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under:- "29. Judicial discipline and propriety are the two significant facets of administration of justice. Every court is obliged to adhere to these principles to ensure hierarchical discipline on the one hand and proper dispensation of justice on the other. Settled canons of law prescribe adherence to the rule of law with due regard to the prescribed procedures. Violation thereof may not always result in invalidation of the judicial action but normally it may....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Supreme Court of India. In order to maintain judicial discipline and consistency in the functioning of the Commission, we direct that the Commission shall give appropriate attention to the doctrine of precedence and shall not overlook the judgments of the courts dealing with the subject and principles applicable, in a given case. It is not only the higher court's judgments that are binding precedents for the Information Commission, but even those of the larger Benches of the Commission should be given due acceptance and enforcement by the smaller Benches of the Commission. The rule of precedence is equally applicable to intra-court appeals or references in the hierarchy of the Commission". 18. In the case or Dr. H. Phunindre Singh and others Vs. K.K. Sethi and another (1998) 8 SCC 640 (para 2) Hon'ble Supreme Court considered the question of deliberate violation of the subsisting order of the Court and held as under:- " 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. In our view, in the facts of the case, particularly when the order passed by the learned Single Judge of the High Court was not stayed by the Division, Bench, the contempt petition should have been disposed of on merit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... same on merit, it was not open for the Tribunal to make observation that the claim petition was barred by principle of res judicata and not maintainable. Once the writ petition was allowed by the Division Bench of this Court, then Tribunal should have decided the case on merit alone and not on any other ground like being barred by principle of res judicata. It is for the second time that the Tribunal while recording the finding that the claim petition is barred by principle of res judicata. has dismissed the claim petition in violation of the judgment and order of this Court dated 23.8.2005 passed in Writ Petition No.1381 (S/B) of 2005. 5. In the hierarchy of system, the power of superintendence on all subordinate courts, authorities and tribunals is vested under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. After remitting of matter by this Court by the judgment and order dated 23.8.2005, it was not open for the Tribunal to reject the petitioner's case with the finding that the claim petition is barred by res judicata. Learned member of the Tribunal while recording such finding have over stepped jurisdiction vested in them which at the face of record, amounts to contempt of thi....