1. At the outset, I welcome you all to the family of this august institution and I thank the Hon’ble President for giving me this opportunity to interact with you all. I have been directed by the Hon’ble President to talk on a very delicate subject. I consider it to be delicate because, generally, our conduct flows directly from our inherent nature. If our conduct is not in consonance with the expected norms, then to mould it, to fit within the norms, we are expected to change our nature which, it is believed, is very difficult, or almost impossible. Therefore, at the end of the talk, if you feel that you need to undergo some transformation, then, also keep in mind that merely listening to a lecture on conduct or reading some material about it, is not going to help you. A constant, conscious and conscientious effort will be required on your part, to reach the expected levels. Let it be known, that my role here, is not to sermonise. Whatever I am going to say, is not my own creation. They are words of wisdom handed over to us from our esteemed seniors, both present and past and also by acclaimed jurists of this country. Right now, you all may be wondering as to how you will feel when you actually sit on the regular bench and that how you will be accepted by your colleagues and the Bar. Well, let me assure you, if your conduct is conducive, you have won half the battle. How — we now proceed to see, somewhat in detail.

I consider it my privilege to have been assigned the task of sharing my views with my distinguished colleagues on “Art of Writing of Judgments”. The real purpose of sharing thoughts with you is introspection, recapitulations and refreshing our knowledge which is necessary to keep the institution in good health. Without wasting any time, I revert back to the subject that has been assigned to me.

The topic assigned to me is “The Art of Writing Judgments”. Before dealing with the topic it is imperative to understand the meaning of the expression “Judgment”.

As you know, section 2(9) of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 defines the term ‘Judgment’ to mean “The statement given by the Judge of the grounds of a decree or order”.

The above named Querist has forwarded to me a case for opinion through its representatives. I had the benefit of discussing the case with these representatives and being instructed by them.

Based on the facts as cited to me, the discussions with Querist’s representatives and the case laws referred by me above, I have accordingly framed this opinion.

Facts

The facts, as cited to me, are reproduced below:—

1. The Querist is a private limited company engaged in the manufacturing. The Querist makes payments to various agencies for carrying out their various assignments and work like payment to clearing and forwarding agents, professional fees, bus hiring charges etc. and they deduct income tax as required under various provisions of Income-tax Act, 1961 and deposit the same regularly with the Government Treasury.

1. Over period of time, Rules have traditionally played hand maids to Statutory Provisions. This is discipline that was religiously followed both by the law makers and the judiciary. Rules were always meant to be subservient to the Statute. A conflict between the Statute and the Rules was therefore always resolved in favour of the former. The role of Rules, as subordinate legislation, was well understood. Even where Rules were created not by delegated legislation, but by the law makers themselves, they did not enjoy the same force as a principal enactment. This principle was well observed by the Gujarat High Court in its tax decision in the case of CIT vs. Satellite Engineering Ltd. [1978] as reported in 113 ITR 208, 223 (Guj).

1. Introduction This year’s budget is also full of promises and very little on accountability. Unless the concept of accountability is introduced in the Income-tax Act as per the recommendation of Raja Chellia Committee (1992) 197 ITR st. 177 (257), whatever may be the law, the honest tax payers will have to face the difficulties of high-pitched assessment, recovery etc. The Hon’ble Finance Minister has stated that “Debt relief won’t be there every year, it is just a one –time distress measure”. I am of the view, we may not be surprised, similar to amnesty schemes for dishonest taxpayers once in five years, every Finance Minister before election once in five years definitely will try to give some amnesty scheme to farmers so that they will be get the desired support from the masses. Shri N.A. Palkhivala in his article on the occasion of Golden Jubilee celebration of ITAT stated that “Today the Income-tax Act, 1961, is a national disgrace. There is no other instance in Indian jurisprudence of an Act mutilated by more than 3,300 amendments in less than 30 years. Simple provisions like Sections 11 to 13 (which deals with exemptions of the income of charitable trusts) have suffered no less than fifty amendments”

It gives me great pleasure to give this inaugural lecture on the Principles of Natural Justice in this year’s orientation and training programme for the new members of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.

Those of you who have practiced as lawyers must have come across the concept of natural justice. Of course, the laws of nature are designed to promote survival rather than justice. Nature is governed by principles such as the survival of the fittest and prevalence of might over right. When a herd leaves its weak members behind there is no question of the weak being supported or protected. Therefore, ‘natural’ justice is not justice found in nature; it is a compendium of concepts which must be naturally associated with justice, whether these concepts are incorporated in law or not. Justice is a great civilizing force. It ensures that the rule of law rather than the rules of nature prevail in regulating human conduct.

The Hon’ble Chief Guest of this afternoon, Justice Madam Sujata Manohar, former Judge of the Supereme Court of India, Vice President, Mumbai, Shri G. E. Veerbhadrappa and Vice-President, Mumbai Zone Shri K.P.T. Thangal, Members of Mumbai Benches of the Tribunal and the Members who have joined and are on orientation and training.

It is a matter of great pride for all of us to, have our Chief Guest Justice Madam Sujata Manohar, a unique personality, not only one of the best judges of this country who has delivered hundreds of landmark judgments, but a fighter for the right of every individual, to live with dignity, particularly unprivileged and destitute women.

I am not sure whether Madam remembers my meeting with her for the first time about two decades ago in Indore in 1986-87 where I was posted as a Judicial Member. Smt. Roopmati, a young widow had become Sati in Rajasthan and in connection with that issue three lady judges, Madam, Justice Musammad Fatima Biwi and one lady judge from Calcutta High Court were invited to speak at a seminar at Indore. Justice Madam Sujata Manohar at that time impressed everybody with her view point and her concern regarding, difficulties a common woman has to face. Thereafter Justice Madam Sujata Manohar was elevated as a judge of Supreme Court, and we all know how she always remained champion in the cause of justice and fair play. She has stood for the independence of Judicial bodies. We are very lucky, and thankful to her, for sparing her time, to attend and inaugurate this programme, of “Orientation and Training” for new Members.

Independence in redress of grievance to the assesse was the cry of mid forties and that has been the root cause for the emergence of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. From the insurgence of the Tax Legislature in 1868 until 1921 there was only one appeal and that was to the appellate authority designated and named from time to time as District Collector, or the Collector of Division, or the Chief Revenue Authority of the Division or the Commissioner of Income Tax. Second Appeal was not known in tax matters at that time. In 1922 Act, the concept of Second Appeal came into being – First Appeal was provided to the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and the Second Appeal against his order to the Commissioner of Income Tax. Both these authorities under the hierarchical system being under the control of Board of Inland Revenue, imbibed no independence in deciding appeals, and thus, there was a total absence of an independent forum to redress the grievance of the assessees.