Case Law Details
Pr CIT Vs JWC Logistics Park Pvt. Ltd (Bombay High Court)
High Court noted that We are pained to record this most unreasonable attitude on the part of the Advocate for the Revenue of seeking to reargue settled concluded issues, without having obtained any stay from the Apex Court. This results in unnecessary wastage of the scarce judicial time available in the context of the large number of the appeals awaiting consideration. We would expect Mr. Chhotaray, as an Advocate to act with responsibility as an Officer of the Court and not merely argue for the sake of arguing when an issue is clearly covered by the decision of Co- ordinate Bench of the Court and take up scarce judicial time. The Advocate must bear in mind that this is a Court of law and not an University/College debating Society, where debates are held for academic stimulation. We deal with real life disputes and decide them in accordance with the Rule of Law, of which an important limb is uniformity of application of law. This on the basis of judicial discipline and law of precedents.
FULL TEXT OF THE HIGH COURT JUDGMENT / ORDER IS AS FOLLOWS–
1. These two Appeals under Section 260A of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 challenge the common order dated 21st August, 2014 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (the Tribunal). The common order dated 21st August, 2014 is in respect of Assessment Year 2008-09 and 2009-10. Thus, these two Appeals.
2. The identical question raised in the two Appeals which is urged for our consideration is as under :-
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
