DCIT vs. Sham Sunder Sharma (Court: ITAT Chandigarh)

Instead of following the Tribunal’s order, CIT (A) followed his predecessor’s order even though had the Tribunal had set it aside. It is also observed by him in the order that he does not find himself sitting in judgment over the decision/view taken by predecessor. On appeal by the department to the Tribunal HELD allowing the appeal:

• The findings of the CIT (A) show clearly that rather than deciding/viewing the appeal on merits and deciding in compliance with the Tribunal’s order dated 23.11.2011, it was preferred by him to follow the decisions and order passed by predecessor of him. The CIT (A) has gone even to the point of noting in the order (impugned order) that the decisions taken by predecessor of him was correct. Therefore it is very clear that disobedience to the Tribunal’s order has been shown by CIT(A) even though the earlier order was set aside solely by the Tribunal. And the previous order of his predecessor would not stand anywhere in the eyes of law;
• It is a very clear case that shows disrespect to the Tribunal’s order. Thus, contempt proceedings against the CIT (A) could have been initiated for blatantly disrespecting the Tribunal’s order. The MP High Court (MP) in Aggarwal Warehousing and Leasing Ltd. vs. CIT held that tribunal’s order cannot be refused to follow by CIT(A). The CIT (A) is considered as a quasi-judicial authority and it is a sub-ordinate in the judicial hierarchy associated with Tribunal. Each and every order passed by the Tribunal is binding on complete revenue authorities working under the Tribunal’s jurisdiction. The principles of judicial need that the orders given by the higher authorities should be followed or obeyed unreservedly by sub-ordinate authorities;
• The orders given by the CIT(A) are not possible to be sustained in the law and are clearly in defiance of the Tribunal’s order. Since this is the first matter that was reported to us at the time of the course of arguments made by D.R that the CIT (A)’s order shows all defiance of the Tribunal’s order, thus, we are not going to propose at the stage in order to initiate the contempt proceedings against CIT (A). And, he his warned by us to be more careful in the future to follow the Tribunal’s order and should not disrespect the Tribunal’s order.