MAHARASHTRA STATE CO OP AGRI RURAL MULTIPURPOSE DEV. BANK LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 1(3), MUMBAI

Maharashtra State Co-op Agri Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Rural Multipurpose Dev. Bank 1(3), Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Vs. Road, Mumbai-20 Ltd. 15A, Morvi Lane, Chowpathy, Mumbai-400 007 .. Appellant Respondent PAN No. AAAAM9669E Assessee by .. Shri Raturaj H Gurjar, AR Revenue by .. Shri Rahul Raman, CIT DR Date of hearing .. 14-03-2017 Date of pronouncement .. 14-03-2017 O R D E R PER MAHAVIR SINGH, JM:

These four appeal by the assessee are arising out of the orders of CIT(A)- 7, Mumbai, in appeal No. CIT(A)-7/IT-499,505,500&340/12-13 vide same dated 04-03-2017. The Assessments were framed by ACIT Circle-1(3), Mumbai for the A.Y. 2001-02, 2002-03, 2004-05 & 2005-06 vide different order dated 19-12-2008, 31-10-2006 & 20-12-2007 u/s 143(3)/147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ‘the Act’).

“1. The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in law and in facts in facts in passing the order u/s. 250 of the Act and dismissing several grounds of appeal without passing speaking order”

From the above finds he argued that issue need reconsideration by CIT(A) and he should be asked to pass a speaking order. Further, he took us through the issue of reopening adjudicated by him, which reads as under: - “6.4 I have considered the AO’s order as well as the appellant’s submission. Having considered both, I do not find any merits in the arguments of the appellant. After considering the reasons recorded by the AO for opening of assessment, I am in the agreement with the AO that the appellant’s income has escaped the assessment in the year under consideration. Hence, taking note of all the facts available on record, I consider it proper and appropriate to hold that the AO was completely justified and correct in reopening the assessment in the ,5634,5635 &5636/Mum/2013 Maharashtra State Co-op Agri. Rural Multipurpose Dev. Bank Ltd. appellant’s case. Accordingly, appellant’s these grounds of appeal are dismissed.”

4. In view of the above facts it is clear that the CIT(A) has not adjudicated the issue and not at all considered the facts produced before him. Hence, we are of the view that the order of CIT(A) cannot be sustained and has to be set aside. We set aside the order of CIT(A) and remand the matter back to the file of CIT(A) for passing a speaking order after considering the facts of the case on each of the issue. Needless to say that CIT(A) will allow reasonable opportunity to the assessee to represent its case.

5. Similar are facts and circumstances in other years also hence, taking consistent view we set aside the orders of CIT(A) in those years also and remand the matter back to the file of CIT(A) for passing a speaking order after considering the facts of the case on each of the issue. 6. In the result, the appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 14-03-2017.