Mylan Laboratories Ltd. v. NFAC (2022)446 ITR 734 / 287 Taxman 40 // 220 DTR 105/ 329 DTR 502(Telangana) (HC)

S. 144C : Reference to dispute resolution panel – Draft assessment order — Depreciation – Binding precedent – Decision of Supreme Court binding on all Courts and all authorities- Appellate Tribunal – Decision of Tribunal is binding on all authorities [ S. 32, 144C ,(8), 254(1) , Art , 226 ]

The assessee challenged  the draft assessment order on ground that Revenue  had erred in seeking to disallow depreciation on good will  overlooking the order of Tribunal in assessee’s own case on the ground that decision of Tribunal  was not accepted by Revenue and appeal is pending before High Court . The assessee filed writ petition . Allowing the petition the Court held that , Revenue had erred in seeking to disallow depreciation on goodwill by completely overlooking decision of Tribunal in assessee’s own case, stand taken by revenue that said decision had been appealed against and was not binding could not be accepted as unless there was a stay, order decision of Tribunal would be binding on all income-tax authorities within its jurisdiction .  Article 141 of the Constitution of India says that the law declared by the Supreme Court shall be binding on all courts within the territory of India. Therefore, it is the bounden duty of all authorities whether administrative or quasi judicial or judicial to follow the law declared by the Supreme Court.

Principles of judicial discipline require that the orders of the higher appellate authorities should be followed unreservedly by the subordinate authorities. Unless there is a stay, the order or decision of the jurisdictional Tribunal is binding on all Income-tax authorities within its jurisdiction. Referred  UOI v. Kamlakshi Finance Corporation Ltd ( 1992) Supp (1) SCC 443 , Collector of Customs v. Krishna Sales (P) Ltd ( 1994) Supp (3) SCC 73 , Ganesh Beenzoplast Ltd v. UOI ( 2021) 16 GST -OL  519/ (2020) (374 ) ELT 552  ( Bom)(HC) , Himagiri Buildcon and Industries Ltd  v .UOI  ( 2021) 16GSTR-OL 545 ( Bom)( HC)