Contradicting decisions of High Courts - which one should the Tribunal follow?
IN a recent judgement, the Ahmedabad Bench of the ITAT observed, "one thing is apparent that divergent view have been expressed by the Hon'ble Courts …… Since, the Hon'ble High Courts have expressed different views, therefore, we have to apply a thumb rule in respect of the applicability of the precedents cited. A thumb rule is that a latest decision of the Hon'ble High Court is required to be followed to maintain the judicial discipline."
So, now it is not the jurisdictional High Court but the latest High Court.
But the CESTAT recently took a different view. In the case before the CESTAT, there were two conflicting decisions - of the Rajasthan High Court and Orissa High Court. The assesse, the Adjudicating authority and the Commissioner (Appeals) were located within the territorial jurisdiction of the Rajasthan High Court.
The Tribunal located at New Delhi is neither within the territorial jurisdiction of the Orissa High Court nor the Rajasthan High Court and there is no decision on this issue from the Delhi High Court.
Should the Tribunal follow Rajasthan or Orissa High Court? CESTAT held that the Rajasthan High Court decision would prevail.
Please see - 30.05.2013