SANJAY KUMAR VERMA,HARIDWAR vs. ITO, ROORKEE

Date of Hearing : 03-10-2016 Date of Order : 03-10-2016 ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU, J.M.

This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order dated 20.9.2011 of the Ld. CIT(A)-II, Dehradun relating to assessment year 1997-1998. 2. The grounds raised by the assessee read as under:-

1. That the order of the CIT(A) is against law and facts of the case. The Ld. CIT(A) did not consult the record and dismissed the appeal without adjudicating on the points raised.

2. That the AO as well as CIT(A) duty bound to follow the directions of the Hon’ble High Court but on both stages the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court was ignored.

3. That the Ld. CIT(A) did not decide the grounds taken by the appellant that the order u/s. 144/147 dated 2.3.05 does not exist after the judgment of Hon’ble High Court on 28.11.2006 and AO cannot revalidate the assessment which the AO tried to do it u/s. 154.

4. That the Hon’ble High Court judgment is binding on all lower Courts of the State as no SLP was filed by the Department.

5. That the order of Ld. CIT(A) is laconic and the written submissions filed were not considered and after Hon’ble High Court decision, the assessment order u/s. 144/148 does not exist and is a nullity and no demand can be pressed on account of old order u/s. 144.

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

4. We have heard both the parties and perused the records, especially the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A), we find that Ld. CIT(A) has given his finding in the impugned order 20.9.2011 vide para no. 2, 3, 3.1 & 4 at page no. 2 of his order. The said relevant paras are reproduced as under:- “2. The aforesaid appeal filed in Form No. 35 in terms of rule 45 of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 is in time. The Appellant’s grounds of appeal are being reproduced (unaltered) as under:-

(1) That the order is against law and facts of the case. (2) That the AO is duty bound to follow the direction of the Hon’ble High Court which the AO ignored which is an offence. (3) That the gist of the AO clearly indicates here intention and view about the decision of Uttarakhand High Court. (4) That the AO has no jurisdiction to proceed against the assessee on the basis of judgment u/s. 144/147 dated 2.3.2015 which is no more in existence after the judgment of Hon’ble High Court. (5) The assessee craves leave to add, alter any grounds of appeal

3. The replies filed by the Ld. AR, the authorities cited by him, the order of Hon’ble High Court of Uttarakhand and the order u/s. 154 of the Act passed by the Ld. AO, have all been very carefully examined. It is seen that the Ld. AO has passed a well reasoned order which calls for no interference, more so because it has taken into consideration all the material before her, including the directions of Hon’ble High Court of Uttarakhand. 3.1 In view of this position, the appellant’s appeal is dismissed.

4. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.” 4.1 After perusing the aforesaid finding of the Ld. CIT(A), we are of the considered view that that Ld. CIT(A) has passed a non- speaking order on the issues in dispute which is not sustainable in the eyes of law and also against the principle of natural justice. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we set aside the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the issues in dispute afresh, in accordance with law, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the parties and pass a speaking order.

5. In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 03/10/2016.