SWETA SAMIR SHAH,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-19(3)(4), MUMBAI

At the outset, the Ld. AR brought to our noticed that the Ld. CIT(A) has passed an ex-parte order qua assessee for the aforesaid appeals in two (2) assessment years without assigning any reasons by simply observing “Nothing has been brought on records by the assessee, which will allow me to defer with the findings by the AO. Therefore, I do not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the assessing officer. In sum, appeal is dismissed.” to 2944/Mum/2022 A.Y. 2015-16 & 2016-17 Sweta Samir Shah

It has to be borne in mind that “Reasons substitute subjectivity with objectivity. Failure to give reasons amount to denial of justice’ as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Mangalore Ganesh Beedi Works vs. CIT AIR 2005 SC 1308. Every quasi judicial order must be supported by reasons. This is basic principle of natural justice and must be observed in proper spirit. Mere pretence of compliance with it would not satisfy the requirement of law[ refer Siemens Engineering Vs. UOI AIR 1976 SC 1785]. Since the Ld. CIT(A) has not given any reasons for sustaining the additions made by the AO even though the assessee has filed the grounds as well as evidence to substantiate its claim before him, cannot be countenanced. It should be kept in mind that reasons are the soul of the order. Therefore, we set aside the impugned orders of the Ld. CIT(A) and direct him to decide as per sub-section (6) of Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”) which reads as under: - “The order of the Commissioner (appeals) disposing of the appeal shall be in writing and shall state the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reason for the decision”.

Therefore, we direct that the Ld. CIT(A) to spell out the points for determination and give the reasons for his decision as per Section 250(6) of the Act, and in accordance to law. to 2944/Mum/2022 A.Y. 2015-16 & 2016-17 Sweta Samir Shah 5. In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on this 31/01/2023.