Judgment:
1. This appeal was filed by the assessee before this Tribunal on 8-4-1996 as provided in section 253(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as Act), against the order of the Appellate Commissioner of Income-tax confirming the order (intimation) passed by the Assessing Officer in terms of section 143(1)(a) of the Act. This appeal has been allotted by Vice-President (SZ) to Madras 'A' Bench of the Appellate Tribunal.
2. A letter dated 8-1-1997 addressed by one of the partner of the appellant firm to the Dy. Registrar of the Madras Bench of the Tribunal was filed on 9-1-1997 requesting him to post this appeal for early hearing and disposal, as the tax authorities were pressurising and were taking coercive steps for recovery of the demand disputed in this appeal. The letter of the Tax Recovery Officer of the Income-tax Department was also enclosed with the said letter by the appellant.
3. Though the letter was received on 9-1-1997, it was not put up by the Registry before our learned Brothers who constituted 'A' Bench as on 9-1-1997.
However, down in the order sheet of appeal filed on the right hand side, there is an endorsement made on 30th Jan. '97 of the Hon'ble Vice-President (SZ) "post for hearing in March '97". The Registry of this Tribunal perhaps on the basis of this endorsement posted this appeal along with ITA No. 2058 (Mad.)/96 relating to assessment year 1994-95 for early hearing and disposal on 11-3-1997 on out of turn and priority basis. On that day (11-3-1997), we declined to hear this appeal expeditiously on priority and out of turn basis. Our reasons are spelled out in the following paragraphs.
4. The Appellate Tribunal as per section 252(1) of the Act is constituted by the Central Government consisting of Judicial and Accountant Members to exercise the powers and discharge the functions conferred on the Appellate Tribunal by the Act. Once an appeal is filed as provided in section 253(3), the same has to be heard by the Appellate Tribunal as provided in section 254(1) of the Act by giving opportunity to both sides and then to pass order thereon, as the Appellate Tribunal thinks fit. According to section 255 of the Act, the powers and functions of the Appellate Tribunal may be exercised and discharged by Benches constituted by the President of the Appellate Tribunal from among the Members thereof. Subject to the provisions contained in sub-section (3) of section 255, the provisions of sub-section 2 say that, a Bench shall consist of one Judicial Member and one Accountant Member. A little further, sub-section (5) of section 255 of the Act says that the Appellate Tribunal shall have power to regulate its own procedure and the procedures of Benches thereof in all matters arising out of the exercise of its powers or discharge of its functions.
5. In pursuance of the authorisation conferred upon the Appellate Tribunal under section 255(5) of the Act procedural rules have been framed called as the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as 'said' Rules). According to Rule 2(iii) of said Rules "Bench" means a Bench of the Tribunal constituted under sub-section (1) of section 255 read with section (2) thereof and includes the President, Senior Vice-President, Vice-President or any other Member sitting singly under the provisions of sub-section (3) of the said section and a Special Bench constituted under the same provision. Further, according to Rule 2(x) of the said Rules "Tribunal" means the Appellate Tribunal as constituted by the Central Government under section 252, and includes, where the context so requires, a Bench exercising and discharging the powers and functions of the Tribunal. In the said Rules, Rule 4 says that : A Bench shall hear and determine such appeals and applications made under the Act as the President may by general or special order direct. Sub-rule (2) of Rule 4 of the said Rules say that where there are two or more Benches of the Tribunal working at any headquarters, the President or, in his absence the Senior Vide-President/Vice-President of the concerned zone or, in his absence, the Seniormost Member of the station present at the headquarters may transfer an appeal or an application from any one or such Benches to any other.
6. From the analysis of the above provisions, it is clear that a Bench consisting of one Judicial Member and one Accountant Member is the Appellate Tribunal empowered and authorised to exercise the powers and discharge the functions of the Appellate Tribunal in hearing and deciding the appeals and all other matters in relation thereto.U.P.Sales Tax Service Association v. Taxation Bar Association AIR 1996 SC 98 at page 101 that : "The Courts of justice and all Tribunals exercising judicial functions from the highest to the lowest are by their constitution entrusted with functions directly connected with administration of justice." The Apex Court as far back as in the year 1967 in the case of Esthuri Aswathiah v. CIT [1967] 66 ITR 478 has held : "The function of the Tribunal in hearing an appeal is purely judicial." 8. It is also well known principle of administration of justice that judicial proceedings commence upon filing of the appeal as provided in an enactment. Thus hearing both sides in an appeal/application is thus a judicial function and no administrative instructions can be given which may amount to interference in the judicial functioning of the Tribunal and thereby affecting the independence of the judiciary.
9. It consequently follows from the above discussion that a Bench of the Appellate Tribunal should pass judicial orders on any application filed before it directly or through a ministerial staff for consideration be it for (f) any other matter requiring interference of this Appellate Tribunal in respect of dispensation and administration of justice in any appeal, application or in any matter pending or arising before the Appellate Tribunal.
10. The judicial orders, by the concerned Bench of the Appellate Tribunal and not administrative orders, have to be passed for expeditious and out of turn hearing of any appeal or application. In this case, no judicial order is passed by 'A' Bench of the Tribunal directing or ordering the Registry to post this appeal for expeditious and/or out of turn on priority basis.
11. It is one of the most time-honoured and cardinal rule of administration of justice that a party (adversary) should be heard by any Court or Tribunal in the manner he has approached the Court/Tribunal and that he should never be preferred or selected over other litigants/adversaries from the long pending queue unless and until, we repeat, unless and until there are strong compelling and justifiable reasons for bestowing a preferential treatment to a party for hearing him on priority and out of turn basis. Breach of this salutory principle will not only cause prejudice to other litigants who are waiting in the long queue but even cause injustice to them and the Court/Tribunal may be accused of arbitrariness for preferring one litigant over the others from the long queue of pending appeals/applications.
12. There are more than 21,000 appeals, cross-appeals and applications pending before the Madras Benches of the Appellate Tribunal involving crores of rupees of Govt. revenue. This appellant therefore cannot be favoured and chosen and preferred for an out of turn and priority hearing of its appeal on the specious plea that the tax authorities are pressurising for payment of Govt. dues blocked in the pending appeal and therefore he should be preferred over others and be heard expeditiously on priority and out of turn basis. We cannot choose and pick out this appellant from the long queue of appeals and applications and hear him expeditiously. We will be acting arbitrarily and doing injustice to other appellants/applicants waiting patiently in the long queue for their turn to be heard for justice.
13. We have studied the facts of the case and the grounds taken by the appellant in the appeal but do not find any special feature requiring preferential or selective treatment over other appeals. The revenue demand is also not huge or exorbitant so as to cause any distress or hardship to the appellant/assessee compelling us to hear this appeal expeditiously on priority and out of turn basis.
14. We therefore order and direct the Registry Officials to take out this appeal as well as the appeal relating to assessment year 1994-95 of the appellant being ITA No. 2058 (Mds.)/96 from out of the list of priority appeals and post these two appeals for hearing and disposal in the normal course and in strict seriatim and chronology maintained by the Registry without giving any preference or special treatment of hearing to this appellant/assessee. We order and direct accordingly.
15. We further order and direct the Registry Officials to place all petitions in all other cases for early hearing through the Hon'ble Vice President (SZ) before the learned Brothers constituting a particular Bench on the day when the early hearing petition is filed by any appellant in the Registry.