Thursday 7 August 2014

Statutory body like the ITAT is expected to show consistency. Change in constitution of Bench does not mean diametrically opposite views can be taken

M/s Unique Artage vs. UOI (Rajasthan High Court)

It is really surprising that the Tribunal having once held that the petitioner has a prima facie case while disposing of its stay petition, has taken diametrically opposite view when it later dismissed the stay petition. Moreover, when the stay petition was already dismissed, which stay petition was again dismissed, is not clear. Notwithstanding change of composition of the bench, a certain amount of consistency is expected in the working of a statutory Tribunal like the ITAT. The learned senior counsel is right when he argues that if the Tribunal had formed an opinion, albeit tentatively, in the matter, it should have heard and decided the appeal itself. Having regard to the fact that already when the Tribunal had earlier observed that petitioner had an arguable case, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the Tribunal to finally hear and decide the appeal

No comments:

Amendment of BE on Payment of IGST for Advance Authorisation Default

  This is to update you about an important decision by Kerala Hon’ble High Court (HC) in the case of Travancore Cocotuft Private Limited v....