JANARADAN SINGH(HUF),BUXAR vs. ACIT, CIR-1, PATNA, PATNA

This is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, [in short “the Ld. CIT(A)”] in appeal No. CIT(A), Patna- 1/10648/2019-20 for the Assessment Year 2017-18.

Shri A.K. Rastogi and Shri Rakesh Kumar, Advocate appeared on behalf of the assessee and Shri Ashwani Kumar, Sr. DR appeared on behalf of the Revenue. It was submitted by the Ld. AR that notice of Janaradan Singh (HUF) hearing had been received by the assessee in the e-proceedings and the assessee had also responded and uploaded substantial submissions before the Ld. CIT(A). It was submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) without considering the submissions of the assessee has adjudicated in an exparte manner and did not consider the evidence submitted before him. In reply, the Ld. Sr. DR supported the order of Ld. CIT(A). We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the submissions produced by the assessee shows that the assessee has submitted substantial evidence before the Ld. CIT(A). The e-proceedings acknowledgment shows as follows:

A perusal of the order of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee shows that submissions made by the assessee have not been considered when he disposed of appeal by the assessee. It is worthwhile to mention that justice 2 Janaradan Singh (HUF) should not only done but it should also be seen to be done. Passing a speaking order is something that an authority is expected to do when he is given the duty to adjudicate on issues; it is not only that the Ld. CIT(A) has not considered any of the evidence submitted by the assessee but has gone on to hold that the assessee has not proved any of the transaction. This being so as a non-speaking order has been passed by the Ld. CIT(A), the issues in the appeal are restored to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for re- adjudication, after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard and after considering the response of the assessee, if any filed.