- (1.) By order dated 13.3.2008, a reference was made too larger Bench and that is how these cases are before us. The order, of reference, inter-alia, reads as follows: In view of the aforesaid position, we are of the opinion that matter requires Consideration by a larger Bench to the extent Whether revenue can be precluded from defending itself by relying upon the contrary Decision. We make it clear that we are not doubting the correctness of the view taken by this Court in the cases of Union of India v. Kaumudini Narayan Dalal (2001)10 SCC 231; CIT v. Narendra Doshi and CIT v. Shivsagar Estate (2004) 9 SCC 420 to the effect that if the revenue has not Challenged the correctness of the law laid down by the High Court and accepted it in the Case of one assessee, then it is not open to the Revenue to challenge its correctness in the Case of other assesses, without just cause. Registry is directed to place the papers before the Hon ble Chief Justice of India for Appropriate orders.
(2.) In terms of the reference what is required to be decided is whether revenue can be precluded from defending itself by relying upon the contrary decisions. It is to be noted that Various High Courts have taken contrary views. While some of the courts have decided in favour of the assessee, other High Courts have decided in favour of the revenue.
(3.) For deciding the issue few decisions of this Court need to be noted.;