MANSAROVER INVESTMENT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-16(1), NEW DELHI

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. A.R. of the assessee, has stated that Ld. CIT(A) passed the non-speaking order dated 30.1.2018 without providing sufficient opportunity to the assessee for substantiating his claim before him and did not consider the documents/evidences filed before the AO as well as before Ld. CIT(A), while deciding the appeal of the assessee. He has requested that assessee has all the necessary evidences and can again produce before the Ld. CIT(A), if this Bench give an opportunity to the assessee for producing all the necessary documents before the Ld. CIT(A) for substantiating its claim. In this behalf he filed the paper Book containing pages 1 to 92.

On the contrary, Ld. DR relied upon the orders of the authorities below and opposed the request of the assessee’s counsel.

I have heard both the parties and perused the records. I have also gone through the orders passed by the revenue authorities. I find force in the arguments of the Ld. Counsel of the assessee Ld. CIT(A) has passed the non-speaking impugned order dated 30.01.2018, without considering the documents / evidences filed before the Ld. CITAA) and also did not comment upon the same, which is not tenable. I further find that before the Tribunal the assessee has filed a Paper Book containing pages 1 to 92 in which he has attached the copy of computation of income; calculation of interest expenses claimed at Rs. 56,81,614/- in the computation of income; copy of annual accounts for FY 2012-13 (AY 2013-14); details of interest expenses paid; details of interest income earned on advances given; details of interest income earned on FDR; details of loans given by the assessee company alongwith copies of accounts of all the parties showing the sources of advances given; details of loans taken by the assessee company; copy of letter dated 9.10.2015 filed with AO during the assessment proceedings alongwith justification of interest free advances given by the assessee company; calculation of disallowance as per Rule 8D; copy of the ITAT order in assessee’s own case for AY 2010-11 and copy of written submissions before the Ld. CIT(A), which has not been considered by the Ld. CIT(A) and also he did not comment upon the same in his impugned order. Therefore, in my considered view, the Ld. CIT(A) has passed the non-speaking impugned order which is not sustainable in the eyes of law. Hence, in the interest of justice, the issues in dispute are set aside to the file of Ld. CIT(A) to decide the same afresh, under the law, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to file all the necessary documents to substantiate its case and fully cooperate with the Ld. CIT(A) in the proceedings and did not take any unnecessary adjournment.

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed for statistical purpose.