{"id":468,"date":"2011-04-22T12:35:03","date_gmt":"2011-04-22T12:35:03","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.itatonline.org\/blog\/?p=468"},"modified":"2011-04-22T12:35:03","modified_gmt":"2011-04-22T12:35:03","slug":"yes-a-court-but-why-no-power-to-punish-for-contempt","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/blog\/yes-a-court-but-why-no-power-to-punish-for-contempt\/","title":{"rendered":"Yes, a Court, But Why No Power To Punish For Contempt?"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/www.itatonline.org\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2011\/04\/contempt_court.jpg\" alt=\"\" title=\"\" width=\"200\" height=\"200\" class=\"alignleft size-full wp-image-469\" srcset=\"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2011\/04\/contempt_court.jpg 200w, https:\/\/itatonline.org\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2011\/04\/contempt_court-150x150.jpg 150w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 200px) 100vw, 200px\" \/><\/p>\n<p><strong>The author raises the seminal  question as to why, while the Tribunal has all the trappings of a Court, does  it not have the power to punish for contempt. He cautions lower authorities  that the lack of contempt power is no reason for not following the binding judgements of  the Tribunal. He also makes a fervent plea to all practitioners to uphold the  honour &amp; dignity of the great Institution<\/strong>.\n<\/p>\n<p>Under the Income tax Act, the Income  Tax Appellate Tribunal is a final fact finding authority.&nbsp; In <strong>Ajay Gandhi v B. Singh<\/strong> (2004) 265  ITR 451 Apex Court observed that &ldquo;<em>The Income tax Appellate Tribunal  exercises judicial functions and has the trapping of a Court<\/em>&rdquo;. Apex Court  in <strong>ITAT v V.K. Agrawal<\/strong> (1999) 235 ITR 175 has held that interfering with  administration of justice of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal will amount to  contempt of Court. In an historic judgment then law secretary was held for  contempt. It is now beyond doubt that the Income tax Appellate Tribunal has all  the powers of Court. It can issue summons and&nbsp;  exercise all the powers vested in the Income tax authorities under  section 131 of the income Tax&nbsp; Act, hence  any proceedings before the Income tax Appellate Tribunal shall be deemed to be  judicial proceedings within the meaning of sections 193 and 228 for the purpose  of section 196 of the Indian Penal code. The Tribunal shall be deemed to be a  Civil Court for all the purposes of section 195 and Chapter XXXV of the Code of  Criminal Procedure 1898.\n<\/p>\n<p><!--more--><\/p>\n<div align=\"center\">\n<div class=\"\"><script type=\"text\/javascript\"><!--\ngoogle_ad_client = \"pub-6440093791992877\";\n\/* judgements_adsense *\/\ngoogle_ad_slot = \"0133843924\";\ngoogle_ad_width = 728;\ngoogle_ad_height = 90;\n\/\/-->\n<\/script><br \/>\n<script type=\"text\/javascript\"\nsrc=\"https:\/\/pagead2.googlesyndication.com\/pagead\/show_ads.js\">\n<\/script><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"articlequote\">\n<p>To resent the questions asked by a judge, to be disrespectful to him, to question his authority to ask questions, to shout at him, to threaten him with transfer and impeachment, to use insulting language and abuse him, to dictate the order that he should pass, to create scenes in the Court, to address him by losing temper area all acts calculated to interfere with and obstruct the course of justice<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p>Under the Contempt Courts Act 1971 &ldquo;Civil contempt&rdquo; is  defined in section 2 (b) &ldquo;Civil contempt&rdquo; means willful disobedience to any  judgment, direction, orders writ, process of a Court&rdquo;. The Court is not defined  under the Contempt Courts Act 1971. The Income tax Appellate Tribunal therefore  is also competent to initiate contempt proceedings, however, it has no power to  punish for its contempt. Judicial discipline demands that authorities  subordinate to the Income tax Appellate Tribunal must accept as binding  decisions of the Tribunal. In <strong>Khalid Automobiles v UOI<\/strong> (1995) 4 SCC (Suppl)  652, the Court held that an order of Tribunal was binding on the assessing  Officer and the first Appellate authority and the failure to follow the same  may constitute contempt of Tribunal&rsquo;s order (Refer <strong>Rajendra Mills Ltd v Jt  CIT<\/strong> (1971) 28 STC 483 (Mad), <strong>Senthil Raj Metal v GTO<\/strong> (1990) 79 STC  38 (Mad) and <strong>UOI&nbsp;&nbsp; v Kamalakshi  Finance Corporation Ltd<\/strong> AIR 1992 SCC 711 (712). It is desired that in an  appropriate case the Income tax Appellate Tribunal may take an appropriate step  for contempt for not following the binding nature of the order of Income Tax  Appellate Tribunal by lower authorities so that judicial discipline is  maintained.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>In a land mark decision the Apex  Court in <strong>Re: Vinay Chandra Mishra<\/strong> (1995) 2 Supreme Court cases 584, a  senior Advocate held to be guilty of contempt for making certain allegation and  threatening to transfer a presiding judge. In a letter to Chief justice the  Judge concerned wrote as under (594) &ldquo;<em>It is not the question of insulting of  a judge of this institution but it is a matter of institution as a whole. In  case dignity of Judiciary is not being maintained then where this institution  will stand. In case a Senior advocate, President of Bar and Chairman of Bar  Council of India behaves in Court in such manner what will happen to other  advocates<\/em>&rdquo;. While dealing with the issues the Apex Court has made certain  important observations which deserves to remembered by all the concerned who  represent before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal or Court, to maintain  dignity and honour of the Institution.&nbsp;  The Apex Court observed that at 614. &ldquo;<em>No one expects a lawyer to be  subservient to the Court while presenting his case and not to put forward his  arguments merely because the Court is against him.&nbsp; In fact, that is the movement when he is  expected to put forth his best effort to persuade the Court.&nbsp; However, if, in spite of it, the lawyer finds  that the Court is against him, he is not expected to be discourteous to the  Court or to fling hot words or epithets or use disrespectful, derogatory or  threatening language or exhibit temper which has the effect of&nbsp; overbearing the Court. Cases are won and lost  in the Court daily. One or other side is bound to lose. The remedy of the  losing lawyer or the litigant is to prefer an appeal against the decision and  not to indulge in a running battle of words with the Court. That is the least  that is expected of a lawyer. Silence on some occasions is also an argument.  The lawyer is not entitled to indulge in unbecoming conduct either by showing  his temper or using unbecoming language<\/em>&rdquo;.<\/p>\n<div align=\"center\">\n<div class=\"\"><script type=\"text\/javascript\"><!--\ngoogle_ad_client = \"pub-6440093791992877\";\n\/* judgements_adsense *\/\ngoogle_ad_slot = \"0133843924\";\ngoogle_ad_width = 728;\ngoogle_ad_height = 90;\n\/\/-->\n<\/script><br \/>\n<script type=\"text\/javascript\"\nsrc=\"https:\/\/pagead2.googlesyndication.com\/pagead\/show_ads.js\">\n<\/script><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"articlequoteleft\">\n<p>Role expected of a lawyer representing the interests of his client and as an officer of the Court. All who represent before the Income tax Appellate Tribunal whether they are lawyers, Chartered accountants or departmental representatives must follow the principle laid down by the Apex Court to maintain the dignity and honour of the institution<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p>  The Apex Court at P 616 also made  following Observations &ldquo;<em>To resent the questions asked by a judge, to be  disrespectful to him, to question his authority to ask questions, to shout at  him, to threaten him with transfer and impeachment, to use insulting language  and abuse him, to dictate the order that he should pass, to create scenes in  the Court, to address him by losing temper area all acts calculated to  interfere with and obstruct the course of justice. Such acts tend to overawe  the Court and to prevent it from performing its duty to administer justice<\/em>&rdquo;.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>The Court also observed that &ldquo;<em>Brazenness  is not outspokenness and arrogance is not fearlessness. Use of intemperate  language is not&nbsp;&nbsp; assertion of right nor  is a threat an argument. Humility is not servility and Courtesy and politeness  are not lack of dignity. Self&ndash;restraint and respectful attitude towards the  Court, presentation of correct facts and law with a balanced mind and without  overstatement, suppression, distortion, or embellishment are requisites of good  advocacy. A lawyer has to be a gentleman first. His most valuable asset is  respect and goodwill he enjoys among his colleagues and in the Court<\/em>&rdquo;.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>Role expected of a lawyer  representing the interests of his client and as an officer of the Court. All  who represent before the Income tax Appellate Tribunal whether they are  lawyers, Chartered accountants or departmental representatives must follow the  principle laid down by the Apex Court to maintain the dignity and honour of the  institution. It may so happen that too much aggressiveness and disrespect to  the bench and institution may lead to Contempt Proceedings. If the judiciary is  to perform its duties and functions effectively and remain true to the spirit  with which they are sacredly entrusted to it, the dignity and the authority of  the Courts have to be respected and protected at all costs. Otherwise, the very  cornerstone of our constitutional scheme will give way and with it will  disappear the rule of law and the civilized life in the society.&nbsp; As per the Contempt of Courts Act 1971 a  reference can be made by the subordinate Court to the High Court in respect any  contempt. The Tribunal being subordinate to the High Court can make a reference  to the High Court in an appropriate case following due process of law. In this  regard the CAT has specific rules i.e. The Contempt of Court (C.A.T.) Rules  1992 whereby the CAT exercise the powers conferred by the Contempt of Courts  Act, 1971, similar power is also conferred on the proposed National Tax  Tribunal, &nbsp;however such powers are not  conferred to the ITAT.&nbsp; Let us make an  honest attempt to preserve the Honour and dignity of the Institution while  making representation before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and Court. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>Dr. K. Shivaram<br \/>\n <img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/www.itatonline.org\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2008\/12\/ksa_sign.gif\" alt=\"ksa_sign\" title=\"ksa_sign\" width=\"97\" height=\"41\" class=\"alignnone size-full wp-image-57\" \/><br \/>\n  Editor in Chief, AIFTP &#038; President, ITAT Bar Association <\/p>\n<p>Reproduced with permission from the AIFTP Journal, April 2011<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The author raises the seminal  question as to why, while the Tribunal has all the trappings of a Court, does  it not have the power to punish for contempt. He cautions lower authorities  that the lack of contempt power is no reason for not following the binding judgements of  the Tribunal. He also makes a fervent plea to all practitioners to uphold the  honour &amp; dignity of the great Institution<\/p>\n<div class=\"read-more\"><a href=\"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/blog\/yes-a-court-but-why-no-power-to-punish-for-contempt\/\">Read more &#8250;<\/a><\/div>\n<p><!-- end of .read-more --><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[3],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-468","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-judiciary"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/468","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=468"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/468\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=468"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=468"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=468"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}