SMT. SURAJ BALA DHULL,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

The present appeal has been filed by the assessee assailing the correctness of the order dated 23.03.2016 of the CIT(A)-20, New Delhi pertaining to 2010-11 AY on various grounds. However, the parties were heard only in respect of Ground No. 1 which reads as under:- 1. “That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the orders passed by the Assessing Officer (“Ld.AO”) and Ld.CIT(A) are bad in law and void ab-initio.” 2. Both the parties have been heard.

3.2. “I have considered the assessment order and fact of the case. The appellant has failed to submit any evidences or submissions in support of the grounds of appeal despite several opportunities. In view the circumstances of the case, I am unable grant any relief to the appellant. Accordingly, the ground of appeal is dismissed.”

I.T.A .No.-2982/Del/2016 4. On a consideration of the submissions by the parties, I find that the above finding by no stretch of imagination, can be said to be a finding which can be upheld. The procedure required to be followed by the Commissioner(Appeals) for deciding the appeals set out in section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. After fixing the date of hearing in terms of sub- section (1) of section 250 the Commissioner (Appeals) is required to not only state the points for determination before him but is also required to justify the conclusion by way of passing a reasoned speaking order. The relevant section is reproduced hereunder:- PROCEDURE IN APPEAL 250. “(1) The Commissioner (Appeals) shall fix a day and place for the hearing of the appeal, and shall give notice of the same to the appellant and to the Assessing Officer against whose order the appeal is preferred. (2) The following shall have the right to be heard at the hearing of the appeal— (a) the appellant, either in person or by an authorised representative; (b) the Assessing Officer, either in person or by a representative. (3) The Commissioner (Appeals) shall have the power to adjourn the hearing of the appeal from time to time. (4) The Commissioner (Appeals) may, before disposing of any appeal, make such further inquiry as he thinks fit, or may direct the Assessing Officer to make further inquiry and report the result of the same to the Commissioner (Appeals). (5) The Commissioner (Appeals) may, at the hearing of an appeal, allow the appellant to go into any ground of appeal not specified in the grounds of appeal, if the Commissioner (Appeals) is satisfied that the omission of that ground from the form of appeal was not wilful or unreasonable. (6) The order of the Commissioner (Appeals) disposing of the appeal shall be in writing and shall state the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reason for the decision. (6A) In every appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals), where it is possible, may hear and decide such appeal within a period of one year from the end of the financial year in which such appeal is filed before him under sub-section (1) of section 246A. (7) On the disposal of the appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) shall communicate the order passed by him to the assessee and to the 88[Principal Chief Commissioner or] Chief Commissioner or 88[Principal Commissioner or] Commissioner.”

5. A perusal of the above statutory mandate set out the procedure to be followed by the Commissioner (Appeals) while deciding the appeals. The said requirement cannot be said to the complied with by an order where even the basic facts have not been addressed nor the points arising out of the grounds filed which arose for determination in the appeal filed and without addressing the reasons for concurring with the conclusion arrived at, the Statutory mandate cannot be said to be fulfilled.

I.T.A .No.-2982/Del/2016 5.1. Accordingly on account of the above detailed reasons, the impugned order is set aside and the issues are restored to the file of the CIT(A) with a direction to pass a speaking order in accordance with law after giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. The order is pronounced in the open court on 07th of November, 2016.