Special Bench Can’t Be Restrained From Deciding Issue Merely Because Similar Issue is Pending Elsewhere | ITAT

Case Details: J. P. Morgan Chase Bank, NA vs. Joint Commissioner of Income-tax - [2025] 173 taxmann.com 837 (Mumbai-Trib.)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• Justice C.V. Bhadang | President, Saktijit Dey | Vice President, B.R. Baskaran, Ms. S. Padmavathy | Accountant Member & Smt. Beena Pillai | Judicial Member
• P.J. Pardiwala & Nitesh Joshi for the Appellant.
• Ms Shilpa Goel, Special Counsel for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

The issue before the Mumbai Tribunal was:

“Whether the issue of withdrawal of the reference to the Special Bench of three Members be withdrawn in the wake of the Jurisdictional High Court admitting an identical question in the case of another assessee, viz. HSBC Bank Oman S.A.O.G”

ITAT Held

The Tribunal held that there is no prohibition, either in law or in practice, that would require the Special Bench to stay its hands when a similar/identical issue is pending before the High Court. This is, albeit subject to considerations of propriety, which the Special Bench itself may consider depending on the facts and circumstances of each case.

In the instant case, except that the appeal by another assessee, namely HSBC Bank Oman S.A.O.G, has been admitted by the High Court, nothing has been brought on record to require the Special Bench to stay its hands. There is no reason why the Special Bench should be deconstituted, and the reference withdrawn.

List of Cases Reviewed

• DCIT v. Summit Securities Ltd., 132 ITD 1 (Mum)(SB) [Para 37] followed.
• Santosh Devi v. National Insurance Company Ltd. and ors. (2012) 6 SCC 421
• Harsha Achyut Bhogle v. ITO (114 TTJ 266 (Mum)
• Harihar Collections & Raj Grow Impex LLP v. UOI – 2020 SCC OnLine Bom 1622
• Kishor s/o Bhikansingh Rajput v. Preeti w/o Kishor Rajput – WP No. 7502 of 2006 dated 07.02.2007
• State of Andhra Pradesh v. Raghu Ramakrishna Raju Kanumuru (2022) 8 SCC 156
• State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors v. Yogendra Mohan Sengupta and Anr (2024 SCC OnLine SC 36)[Paras 26, 27, 33 and 34] distinguished.

List of Cases Referred to

• Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corpn. v. Deputy DIT (IT) [2012] 19 taxmann.com 364/136 ITD 66 (Mumbai) (para 3)
• Andhra Bombay Carriers v. Addl. CIT [2011] 12 taxmann.com 372/132 ITD 1 (Mumbai) (para 7)
• Harsha Achyut Bhogle v. ITO [2008] 171 Taxman 108 (Mumbai) (para 10)
• Harihar Collections & Raj Grow Impex LLP v. UOI – 2020 SCC OnLine Bom 1622 (para 11)
• State of Andhra Pradesh v. Raghu Ramakrishna Raju Kanumuru (2022) 8 SCC 156 (para 11)
• UOI v. Paras Laminates (P) Ltd. [1990] 186 ITR 722 (para 14)
• Daks Copy Services (P.) Ltd. v. ITO [1989] 30 ITD 223 (Bombay) (para 14)
• Zuari Industries Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT [2007] 105 ITD 569/[2006] 9 SOT 563 (Mumbai) (para 18)
• Paperbase Co. Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT [2008] 19 SOT 163 (Delhi) (para 18)
• CIT v. Attili N. Rao 119 Taxman 1030/[2001] 252 ITR 880 (SC) (para 19)
• Santosh Devi v. National Insurance Company Ltd. and ors. (2012) 6 SCC 421 (para 34)
• Sarla Verma and ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation and Anr. (2009) 6 SCC 121 (para 34).