Commissioner of Income-tax, Jabalpur v. Northern Coal Fields Limited
[Citation -2020-LL-0116-72]

Citation 2020-LL-0116-72
Appellant Name Commissioner of Income-tax, Jabalpur
Respondent Name Northern Coal Fields Limited
Court HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 16/01/2020
Assessment Year 1989-90, 1990-91, 1991-92, 1992-93, 1993-94, 1994-95, 1995-96, 1996-97, 1997-98, 2002-03
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags substantial question of law • filing of appeal • grant approval • salary expenses
Bot Summary: ORDER 16.1.2020 Per: Ajay Kumar Mittal, CJ In the present appeal preferred by the Revenue under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act 1961(for short the Act ), challenge is to an order dated 26.10.2005 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,, Jabalpur Bench, Jabalpur in ITA Nos. 206 to 213/JAB/2003 and ITA No.253(JAB)/2003 in respect of the Assessment Years 1989-90 to 1997- 98 and 2002-03 respectively, whereby all the appeals filed by the appellant- Revenue were dismissed. Whether learned ITAT was justified in ignoring the provisions of Section 192 of the Act when it clearly speaks that person responsible for paying income chargeable under the head Salaries shall at the time of payment deducted income tax on the amount payable at the average of the income tax computed on the basis of the rates enforce for the financial year in which the payment is made on the estimated income of the assessee, under this head for that financial year 3. The identical question involved in the present case has been answered in MAIT No.64/2006 decided today and relying upon the decision of the Supreme Court in Electronics Corporation of India Limited vs. Union of India and others - 3 SCC 404 this Court has held that COD approval is not necessary for filing the appeal. For the same reasons as recorded in detail in MAIT No.64/2006, the order impugned in this appeal stands quashed. The matter is remanded to the learned Tribunal to re-decide the appeal on merits in accordance with law. Accordingly, the present appeal stands allowed and disposed of.


MAIT No.58/2006 (1) HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH: JABALPUR (Division Bench) MAIT No.58/2006 APPELLANT : Commissioner of Income Tax, Jabalpur Versus RESPONDENT : Northern Coal Fields Limited, Singrauli (MP) Coram: Hon ble Shri Justice Ajay Kumar Mittal, Chief Justice Hon ble Shri Justice Vijay Kumar Shukla, Judge
Appearance: Shri Sanjay Lal, Advocate for appellant. Shri A. K. Shrivastava, Advocate and Shri Abhijeet Shrivastava, Advocate for respondent. ORDER (Oral) [16.1.2020] Per: Ajay Kumar Mittal, CJ In present appeal preferred by Revenue under Section 260-A of Income Tax Act 1961(for short Act ), challenge is to order dated 26.10.2005 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, (for short Tribunal ), Jabalpur Bench, Jabalpur in ITA Nos. 206 to 213/JAB/2003 and ITA No.253(JAB)/2003 in respect of Assessment Years 1989-90 to 1997- 98 and 2002-03 respectively, whereby all appeals filed by appellant- Revenue were dismissed. 2. appellant has claimed following substantial questions of law for determination by this Court:- MAIT No.58/2006 (2) 1. Whether COD's approval is mandatory in cases where assessee is not P.S.U. but D.D.O's who are disbursing payments to employees and contractors and forced to deduct tax as per provisions of Chapter XVII-B of Act ? 2. Whether learned ITAT was justified in ignoring provisions of Section 192 of Act when it clearly speaks that person responsible for paying income chargeable under head Salaries shall at time of payment deducted income tax on amount payable at average of income tax computed on basis of rates enforce for financial year in which payment is made on estimated income of assessee, under this head for that financial year ? 3. identical question involved in present case has been answered in MAIT No.64/2006 decided today and relying upon decision of Supreme Court in Electronics Corporation of India Limited vs. Union of India and others - (2011) 3 SCC 404 this Court has held that COD approval is not necessary for filing appeal. Accordingly, substantial question of law No. 1 is answered in favour of appellant-Revenue. However, question No.2 as claimed does not arise at this stage as Tribunal has not adjudicated issue on merits. 4. For same reasons as recorded in detail in MAIT No.64/2006, order impugned in this appeal stands quashed. matter is remanded to learned Tribunal to re-decide appeal on merits in accordance with law. 5. Accordingly, present appeal stands allowed and disposed of. (Ajay Kumar Mittal) (Vijay Kumar Shukla) Chief Justice Judge Anchal Digitally signed by ANCHAL KHARE Date: 2020.02.01 12:48:12 +05'30' Commissioner of Income-tax, Jabalpur v. Northern Coal Fields Limited
Report Error