What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had passed a non-speaking order without considering the evidence filed by the assessee. Therefore, the issues were set aside to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

The assessee appealed against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2015-16, primarily arguing that the order was non-speaking and lacked proper consideration of evidence. The appeal concerned additions made to 'Electrical goods expenses' and 'furniture & fixture'.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) passed a non-speaking and unreasoned order, and whether the additions made were justified without proper consideration of evidence.

Grand Nothing Hills Hotel &… vs ACIT | ITAT Delhi 2019

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘SMC’ NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI H. S. SIDHU

ORDER This appeal is filed by assessee against the Order dated 02.1.2019 passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-4, New Delhi relating to Assessment Year 2015- 16 on the following grounds:-

1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in passing a non-speaking and unreasoned order, without taking into consideration, copies

evidence as filed in the impugned proceedings.

2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.

23,88,927/- under the head “Electrical goods expenses”.

3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.

39,67,650/- under the head “furniture & fixture”.

4. Without prejudice to ground no. 2 & 3, the additions

confirmed by the CIT(A) was highly excessive on the facts and circumstances of the case.

The assessee seeks leave to add, modify, forego, or otherwise alter all or any of the grounds of appeal as taken

hereinabove.

Facts narrated by the revenue authorities are not disputed by both the parties, hence, the same are not repeated here for the sake of brevity.

During the hearing, Ld. counsel for the assessee has stated that Ld. CIT(A) has passed a non-speaking order without taking into consideration the evidences filed by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A). He requested that issues in dispute may be set aside to the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the same afresh, as per law, after thoroughly examining the evidences filed by the assessee. He has also filed the Paper Book containing pages 1-223 to support of the claim of the assessee.

On the other hand, Ld. DR has not raised any serious objection on the request of the ld counsel for the assessee.

5. After hearing both the parties and perusing the records, especially the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) alongwith the documentary evidence filed by the assessee for substantiating the claim, I am of the view that the impugned order passed by the Ld. First Appellate Authority is non- speaking order and without considering the evidences filed by the assessee. Keeping in view of the facts and circumstances as explained above and in the interest of justice, I set aside the issues in dispute to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with the directions to decide the same afresh, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee and consider all the evidences / documents to be filed by the Assessee. Assessee is at liberty to file any evidences for substantiating her case before the AO and did not take any unnecessary adjournment in the proceedings.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.

GRAND NOTHING HILLS HOTEL & RESORTS PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-10(2), NEW DELHI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments