JANAK RAJ ARORA PROP.KWALITY TEXTILES vs PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-9

-$~12&.13 . * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 474/2016 JANAK RAJ ARORA PROP.KWALITY TEXTILES Appellant Versus , ' PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-9„... Respondent + ITA 475/2016 SIKANDER LAL KUMAR PRO.M/S SIKANDER LAL RAKESH KUMAR & CO. ' Appellant .

Versus ; ; : - PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-9..... Respondent -Through: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Mr. Somil Agarwal, Mr. Rohit Kurnar Gupta and . - Ms. Mpnika Ghai, Advocates for-the Appellants. -

Mr. Ashok, K. Manchanda, Senior Standing Counsel and Ms. Lakshmi Gurung, Advocate for Respondent. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMIWAZIRI ORDER % 07.12.2016 1. The appellants' grievance is that even while directing the remand in these cases, the ITAT has not applied its mind, in regard to the facts of these two cases. It is pointed out that the grounds on which the Tribunal remitted, for consideration to the AO (in ITA No. 475/2016) are, in fact, related to the son i.e. who is an,appellant in ITA No. 474/2016 '(Janak Raj Arora). The ITAT after quoting the fmdings, viz-a-viz son Janak Raj Arpra, held in the : Case of father Shri. Sikander Lai Kumar that the lorder, required to, be rerhitted. . ; Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Signature Not Verified

Counsel for the Revenue submitted that broadly the conclusions of the ITAT with respect to the non-application of mind and the conjectural nature of findings by the CIT (A) cannot be disputed and that too much error in the recording of the orders cannot be made out of the orders recorded. 3. We have considered these submissions of the parties and also the record. It is quite evident that apart from the egregious errors, which appear in record in paras 23-25 of the impugned order, the Tribunal has also recorded inconsistent directions. At one place, it remitted the matter for consideration to the AO whereas in another, it remanded the matter to the CIT (A) [para 44]. 4. Having regard to these circumstances, impugned orders are hereby set aside and the matter is remitted for fresh consideration and judgment to the ITAT, which shall proceed further in the appeal after giving due notice to the parties. , ' 5. The appeals are allowed in the above terms. S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J. [I WAZIRI, J. DECEMBER 07, 2016 sb

JANAK RAJ ARORA PROP.KWALITY TEXTILES vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-9