Yoginder Kumar Sud vs. President, ITAT (P&H High Court)

DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: May 10, 2013 (Date of publication)

Click here to download the judgement (yoginder_sud_ITAT_Amritsar_complaint.pdf)

Writ to restrain ITAT Members from discharging statutory functions not maintainable

The Petitioner, a Chartered Accountant practicing before the Amritsar Bench of the Tribunal, filed a Writ Petition alleging that he was facing a lot of harassment at the hands of the Judicial Member (Shri. H. S. Sidhu) and the Accountant Member (Shri. B. P. Jain) of the Amritsar Bench. He alleged that the said Members were totally prejudiced against him as he had made a complaint against the Judicial Member to the Tribunal and also because he had not been able to meet the “expectations” and “illegal demands” of the said Members. It was also alleged that the Bench was delaying the matters of the Petitioner or passing unreasoned orders or by totally ignoring him. A Writ of Mandamus was sought for restraining the said Judicial and Accountant Members of the Amritsar Bench from discharging their functions. HELD by the High Court dismissing the Petition:

It appears that the writ petition is to settle scores which the Petitioner might have raised during the course of his conduct as representative of the assessees. The Petitioner has asserted that he is not able to meet the expectations and illegal demands raised by the Members but there are no details as to when and how the demands were raised. Not only the writ petition is bereft of any material particulars but also the Petitioner has no right to claim mandamus for restraining an authority constituted under the Act from discharging the functions entrusted to it by the Statute. The present writ petition is gross abuse of process of law and, therefore, it is dismissed.

4 comments on “Yoginder Kumar Sud vs. President, ITAT (P&H High Court)
  1. Actually if the members made any illegal demands, the process is not resorting to Art 226 but just work on Law of Crimes, that is you can file FIR or complaint before magistrate when the police fails to register case. Art 226 is only a Writ of Mandamus, certiorari…
    If you file FIR you need to have adequate evidence to prove the meat in the matter.
    None is free from Law of Crimes. see what is happening to railway minister of government of India.
    Application of laws is like a Rubix cube.
    So, engage good criminal lawyer who knows nuances of criminal laws..see do not just manipulate facts that is vital in every application of law, after all every law has its own Lakshmana Rekha please.
    Do not file a wrong case that affects credibility after all you need to move court with ‘clean hands’ under any law or Articles of constitution please.
    There is no sovereign immunity to any one in india after promulgation of Constitution of India af Crown proceedings Act 1947 was passed by British parliament.

  2. Sachin Agarwal says:

    We have been observing a great deal of detreoriation in the conduct of judiciary, which is not at all published for want of evidence. From where in the world a practioner could gather evidence against them as he do not want to entangle with them. If he do so, he will lose his bread. A advocate or CA has not other choice, eather surrender or lose the case.

    Even though Dr. Balahishnan is correct, but that is more like a theoritical aspect, please think, whether is it practically possible in all cases.

  3. Vishal Kashyap says:

    And going further, always brothers are saved.

  4. Sachin Agarwal says:

    Everybody knows that there has been a great deterioration in the conduct of judiciary. How evidence could be gathered in each & every case, where in almost every case illegal demands are there. State Tax Appellate Authorities and Tribunals are still more detreoriated.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *