COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. YONUS KUNJU A

JUDGEMENT

(1.) TAX Reference No. 55 of 1991 is already on the file of the registry of this Court well nigh nearly for a period of six years by now. In addition it appears that by the order dt. 5th Oct., 1994, the original petitions referred to above are ordered to be placed for hearing along with the above income tax reference. Obviously, this would create the situation of indefinitely elongating the life of this litigation because with regard to these original petitions, the provisions of S. 256(2) of the IT Act, 1961, would necessitate calling upon the Tribunal with a direction to refer afresh questions with regard to the same proceedings to this Court. Our experience shows that in the process, the life of pendency of the income tax reference of the year 1991 would get prolonged. In fact, this Court in CIT vs. Wandoor Jupiter Chits (P.) Ltd. (In liquidation) (1995) 213 ITR 73, is seen to be very much conscious and at the same time expressing a situation of helplessness of being required to call upon the Tribunal to refer the matter to this Court for adjudication. This is more than apparent from the following observations at page 75 of the report:

(2.) WE were posed with the difficulty of a similar nature by reason of the earlier order of this Court tagging all these proceedings to be heard with each other, as we have placed it at the outset hereinbefore.

(3.) ALL these proceedings relate to the assessment proceedings, in the first instance arising out of the order dt. 12th Oct., 1989, of the Tribunal, Cochin Bench, in I. T. A. No. 1 (Coch) of 1989 and thereafter out of simultaneously initiated penalty proceedings under S. 271(1)(c), ending with cancellation thereof by the order dt. 20th May, 1991, of the Tribunal, Cochin Bench, in I. T. A. No. 988 (Coch) of 1990.