OPLUS STEEL AND POWER PVT. LTD.(FORMERLY KNOWN AS SWATI CONCAST AND POWER PVT. LTD.),KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2550/KOL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 February 2025AY 2013-2014Bench: SHRI SONJOY SARMA (Judicial Member), SHRI RAKESH MISHRA (Accountant Member)9 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the Commissioner (Appeals) failed to pass a speaking order as required by Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) did not adjudicate the appeal on merits and instead dismissed it due to non-compliance.

What were the facts?

The assessee company received a large sum of money from another company, which the Assessing Officer (AO) treated as unexplained credit. The assessee failed to provide sufficient details regarding the source of funds during reassessment and appeal proceedings. The Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the appeal without a detailed adjudication on merits.

What were the issues?

Whether the Commissioner (Appeals) passed a speaking order adjudicating the appeal on merits, and whether the appeal was dismissed correctly due to non-compliance without considering the grounds raised.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 250(6),Section 147,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)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, KOLKATA ‘D’ BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: SHRI SONJOY SARMA & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA

order

: February 28th, 2025 ORDER

PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

1.

This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ld. 'CIT(A)'] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for AY 2013-14 dated 18.10.2024, which has been passed against the assessment order u/s 147/144 of the Act, dated 19.05.2023.

5.

We have heard the Ld. AR. The Ld. DR relied upon the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and requested that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) may be confirmed and the appeal may be dismissed. On perusal of the appellate order, it is noticed that while the Ld. CIT(A) has discussed non- compliance on the part of the assessee as the notices sent were not complied with but he has not adjudicated the appeal on merit. In this respect, it is relevant to examine the provisions of section 250(6) which are reproduced as under:

6.

Thus, section 250(6) of the Act casts a duty on the Ld. CIT(A) to pass an order in appeal which should state the points for determination and the decision as well as the reason for arriving at such decision. In the present case before us, the Ld. CIT(A) has not mentioned the reasons after examining the records while disposing of the appeal. The Ld. CIT(A) has neither adjudicated upon various grounds of appeal

nor has passed a reasoned order for arriving at the decision, as is required u/s 250(6) of the Act. We further note that in Ajji Basha Vs. CIT (2019) 111 taxmann.com 348 (Madras) it has been held that a speaking order on merits with reasons and findings is to be passed by Commissioner (Appeals) on basis of ground raised in assessee's appeal; he cannot dispose of the assessee's appeal merely by holding that Assessing Officer's order is a self-speaking order which requires no interference. The relevant extract from the order is as under:

6. … The first respondent is the appellate authority. Needless to state that the Appellate Authority is also a fact finding authority and therefore, he has to consider the order of assessment on the grounds raised in the appeal and thereafter, pass a speaking order on merits and in accordance with law by giving his own reasons and findings as to whether the order of assessment can be sustained or not. In other words, the order passed by the Appellate Authority should explicitly exhibit his application of mind to the facts and circumstances and the objections raised in the grounds of appeal, also by expressing his reasons and findings in support of his conclusion.

7. In this case, the Appellate Authority, after extracting the order of the Assessing Officer in full, has not given any other reason or finding to dismiss the appeal except by stating that he is of the considered view that the Assessing Officer's order is a self speaking order and does not call for any interference. In my considered view, such single line finding of the Appellate Authority, cannot be sustained as a proper exercise of the Appellate Authority, while disposing the appeal. Therefore, it is apparent that the

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →