DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. IDEAL BROADCASTING INDIA (P) LTD., NEW DELHI

The main grounds raised by the Revenue read as follows:

We have heard arguments of both the sides and carefully perused the relevant material placed on record, inter alia, assessment order, first appellate order of Ld. CIT(A), paper book of the assessee spread over 218 pages and all relevant records placed before us.

We have heard arguments of both the sides and carefully perused all relevant records placed before us on the record. The Ld. Departmental Representative submitted that the A. O made additions/disallowances on right and correct footings which were deleted by the Ld. CIT(A) without any justified reasoning hence, impugned first appellate order may kindly be set aside by restoring that of the A.O on all four issues on which the Ld. CIT(A) granted relief to the assessee. However, the Ld. DR fairly accepted that the A.O did not make any deliberations or adjudication on the submissions and contentions of the assessee which were placed before him during assessment proceeding explain all four issues.

The Ld. AR of the assessee pointed out that the A.O made additions/disallowances without any adjudication on the stand of the assessee on all four issue which resulted into passing an assessment order without any reasoning and basis. The Ld. A.R, supporting the order of the first appellate authority, submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) granted relief to the assessee after due consideration of relevant facts and circumstances of the case and thus order of the Ld. CIT(A) is correct and the same should be sustained and upheld dismissing appeal of the Revenue. However, the Ld. AR fairly submitted if it is found that the A.O could not get an opportunity to comment upon and to verify and examine the details, submissions and explanation of the assessee supported by various relevant documents, then the assessee has no objection if the case is restored to the file of the A.O for reconsideration and reassessment.

On careful consideration of above submissions of both the sides, we are of the opinion that the A.O passed a cryptic order without any adjudication on the submissions and explanation of the assessee by simply making certain observations in Para 2 of the assessment order and in Para 3 he directly jumped to make four disallowances/additions. On appeal by the assessee, Ld. CIT(A) granted part relief to the assessee after considering the relevant explanation, submissions and contentions of the assessee supported by various documents and evidence but at the same time we clearly observe that the A.O was not granted opportunity to comment and verify the same which is mandatory for first appellate authority. In view of above noted facts and circumstances and in the light of submissions of both the sides we are of the considered opinion that the A.O made addition by passing a slip shod and cryptic order and on the other hand the Ld. CIT(A) granted relief to the assessee without providing due opportunity to the A.O to comment upon and to examine and verify the stand and submissions and explanation of the assessee supported by various documents and evidence, thus it is apparent that the case was not conducted properly neither at the assessment stage nor at first appellate stage. Hence, we find it appropriate to restore the case to the file at the A.O at assessment stage for farming afresh denovo assessment by the A.O.

Needless to mention that the A.O shall conduct afresh reassessment proceedings and shall provide due opportunity of hearing to the assessee and shall pass reassessment order without being prejudiced from earlier assessment and first appellate impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A).

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is deemed to be allowed for statistical purposes in the manner as indicated above.