M/S. KHIVRAJ MOTORS (P) LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 808/CHNY/2009Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 December 2017AY 2004-055 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessment orders passed by the Assessing Officer were non-speaking and cryptic, lacking proper discussion. Therefore, the CIT(A) was justified in invoking Section 263.

What were the facts?

The assessees appealed against the CIT(A)'s orders passed under Section 263, revising the assessment orders. The assessees argued that all issues were considered during the original scrutiny assessment.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in revising the assessment orders under Section 263 when the original assessment orders were non-speaking and lacked proper discussion of issues.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263,Section 143(3)

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: CHENNAI

Before: SHRI ABRAHAM P.GEORGE & SHRI GEORGE MATHAN

Hearing: 30.11.2017Pronounced: 05.12.2017

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No.807/Mds/2009
ITA No.808/Mds/2009

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

आदेश / O R D E R PER GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

1.

These are two appeals filed by the assessees. ITA No.807/Mds/2009 is an appeal filed by M/s.Khivraj Automobiles Ltd., against the Order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-I, Chennai, passed u/s.263 in C.No.218/CIT-I/13/263/2008-09 dated 27.03.2009 for the AY 2004-05 and is an appeal filed by M/s.Khivraj Motors Pvt. Ltd., against the Order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-I, Chennai, passed u/s.263 in C.No.218/CIT-I/14/263/2008-09 dated 27.03.2009 for the AY 2004-05.

2.

Shri S.Bharath, CIT., represented on behalf of the Revenue and Shri N.Devanathan, Adv., represented on behalf of the assessee.

3.

As both the appeals are related to the same group of assessees and are on identical issues, both are being disposed of by this common order.

4.

It was submitted by the Ld.AR that the Ld.CIT(A) had invoked the powers u/s.263 to revise Assessment Orders u/s.143(3) on 26.12.2006 in the case of M/s.Khivraj Motors Pvt. Ltd., and on 28.11.2006 in the case of M/s.Khivraj Automobiles Ltd. It was a submission that Ld.CIT(A) failed to appreciate that all the issues raised in Sec.263 proceedings have been considered by the AO in the course of the assessment when completing & 808/Mds/2009 :- 3 -:

the scrutiny assessment u/s.143(3). It was a submission that the order of the Ld.CIT(A) passed u/s.263 in both the cases were liable to be annulled.

5.

In reply, the Ld.DR drew our attention to the Assessment Orders passed by the AOs. In the case of M/s.Khivraj Automobiles Ltd., the Ld.DR drew our attention to Page Nos.47 to 49 of the Paper Book which is a copy of the Assessment Order passed u/s.143(3) on 28.11.2006. It was a submission that none of the issues had been considered nor discussed in the Assessment Order. It was a submission that the Assessment Order was in two pages without any discussions. The Assessment Order in the case of M/s.Khivraj Motors Pvt. Ltd., the Ld.DR drew our attention to Page Nos.62 & 63 of the Paper Book again to submit that none of the issues had been discussed in the Assessment Order and the Assessment Order was a non-speaking order which contained only two pages. It was a submission that the order passed u/s.263 was liable to be upheld. He relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of M/s.Toyota Motor Corporation 306 ITR 49 (Del). It was also submission that the order of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court had been approved by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.5313 of 2008 dated 25.08.2008.

It was a submission that the order of the Ld.CIT(A) passed u/s.263 was liable to be upheld.

6.

We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the Assessment Order passed u/s.263 clearly shows that the Assessment & 808/Mds/2009 :- 4 -:

Orders passed by AO are non-speaking orders. There is no discussion nor is there any reference to any of these issues which have been raised in the order passed u/s.263 by the Ld.CIT(A). A perusal of the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of M/s.Toyota Motor Corporation referred to supra clearly shows that -

“It is also necessary for the parties to know the reasons that have weighed with the adjudicating authority in coming to a conclusion. The order passed by the Assessing Officer should be a self-contained order giving the relevant facts and reasons for coming to the inclusion based on those facts and law. We find that the order passed by the Assessing Officer is cryptic, to say the least, and it cannot be sustained. The Tribunal cannot substitute its own reasoning to justify the order passed by the Assessing Officer when the Assessing Officer himself did not give any reason in the order passed by him. Under the circumstances, we answer the question in the affirmative, in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee and remand the matter hack to the file of the Assessing Officer to decide the issue afresh in terms of the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax under section 263 of the Act”.

7.

A perusal of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s.Toyota Motor Corporation clearly shows that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has approved the order of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court referred to supra. This being so, as it is noticed that the Assessment Orders passed by the AO are non-speaking orders and cryptic. The Ld.CIT is right in invoking his powers u/s.263 and we do not find any error in the order of the Ld.CIT(A) which calls for any interference at this stage.

8.

We are given to understand that the order of the Ld.CIT(A) passed u/s.263 has been given effect to and all the matters have also reached the Tribunal and has been restored back to the AO with directions. As consequential orders have also been passed, we are of the view that the appeals field by the assessees against Sec.263 orders have become & 808/Mds/2009 :- 5 -:

infructuous and even on this ground, the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed.

9.

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessees are dismissed.

More judgments on Section 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →