JAY SHREE TEA & INDUSTRIES LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 4(1), , KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 895/KOL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 July 2025AY 2018-2019Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found the Ld. CIT(A)'s orders for both assessment years to be non-speaking and lacking consideration of the assessee's submissions. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the Ld. CIT(A)'s orders and restored all issues in both appeals to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for readjudication, granting the assessee an opportunity to be heard and raise additional grounds.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed appeals against the Ld. CIT(A)'s orders for Assessment Years 2018-19 and 2020-21, challenging disallowances under Section 14A and related to PF & ESI. The assessee contended that the PF & ESI disallowance should be restricted to 30% as per Rule 8, given its business of manufacturing tea, and that the Ld. CIT(A) failed to consider these submissions.

What were the issues?

Whether the Ld. CIT(A)'s orders regarding disallowance under Section 14A and for PF & ESI were non-speaking and failed to consider the assessee's submissions, warranting a remand for fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 14A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI

Hearing: 26/06/2025Pronounced: 03.07.2025

O R D E R Per George Mathan, JM : These are two appeals filed by the assessee against the separate orders both dated 27.03.2025 of the ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, passed for the assessment years 2018-2019 & 2020-2021, respectively.

2.

It was submitted by the ld. AR that one of the issues was in respect of the disallowance u/s.14A as also there were issues of PF & ESI. It was the submission that the assessee is in the business of manufacturing of tea and consequently in view of the Rule 8 in the computation of income in respect of manufacturing of tea, the disallowance in respect of PF &ESI is to be restricted to 30%. It was the submission that the ld. CIT(A) has not considered the submission of the assessee. It was the submission that the addition as made by the Assessing Officer and as confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) is liable to be deleted.

3. In reply, ld. Sr.DR vehemently supported the orders of the Assessing Officer and the ld.CIT(A).

4.

A perusal of the order of the ld. CIT(A) shows that the ld. CIT(A) for the assessment year 2018-2019 has given his decision in para 6 of his order. Similarly, for assessment year 2020-2021 also the ld. CIT(A) has given his decision in para 6 of his order. It is noticed that in respect of the issue of PF & ESI, the ld. CIT(A) has applied the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd., passed in Civil Appeal No.2833 of 2016, dated 12.10.2022/[2022] 143 taxmann.com 178 (SC)]. In regard to disallowance made u/s.14A of the Act in the assessment year 2018-2019, the ld. CIT(A) has not considered the submission of the assessee. A perusal of the order of the ld. CIT(A) shows that the orders of the ld. CIT(A) are totally non-speaking and has not considered any of the submission of the assessee though the written submission of the assessee has been extracted at length. It must be appreciated that the Tribunal decides the appeal which is against the order of the ld. CIT(A). In absence of a speaking order from the ld.CIT(A), it becomes difficult nay practically impossible for the Tribunal to understand as to what is the view and the reasons on which the ld.CIT(A) has taken the decision in the manner in which he has done. As the orders of the ld.CIT(A) for both the assessment years under consideration are non-speaking order, in the interest of justice, the orders of the ld.CIT(A) are set aside and the issues in both the appeals are restored to the file of the ld.CIT(A) for readjudication. It must also be mentioned here that the assessee has raised the additional ground in both

More judgments on Section 14A

All 15,875 judgments and leading authorities on Section 14A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →