SHRI VIVEK KUMAR GUTGUTIA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, 50(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 392/KOL/2014Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 February 2016AY 2009-20102 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found the orders of the lower authorities to be cryptic and non-speaking, lacking in merit and reasoned discussion. Consequently, the Tribunal quashed the orders and remitted the appeal back to the AO for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was delayed by 5 days due to the illness of the person in charge. The Assessing Officer (AO) framed the assessment under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

What were the issues?

Whether the orders passed by the lower authorities were speaking and reasoned. The absence of proper adjudication and discussion of facts by the lower authorities.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH: KOLKATA

Before: Shri Mahavir Singh, JM]

Hearing: 22.02.2016Pronounced: 22.02.2016

Date of hearing: 22.02.2016 Date of pronouncement: 22.02.2016 For the Appellant: N o n e For the Respondent: Shri Rajat Kumar Kureel, JCIT, Sr. DR ORDER This appeal by assessee is arising out of order of CIT(A)-XXXII, Kolkata vide Appeal No. 141/XXXII/11-12/50(4)/Kol dated 06.12.2013. Assessment was framed by ITO, Wd-50(4), Kolkata u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for Assessment Year 2009-10 vide his order dated 27.12.2011.

2.

At the outset, it is noticed that the appeal by assessee is delayed by 5 days and assessee has filed condonation petition stating that the person in charge was ill and hence, requested vide its letter to condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing. In term of the above, Ld. Sr. DR fairly conceded that the delay can be condoned and accordingly, the delay of 05 days is condoned and the appeal is admitted.

3.

At the time of hearing, I have gone through the orders of lower authorities and seen that the orders passed by the authorities below are cryptic and non-speaking. There is no iota of merits discussed in their orders. The duty of the authorities below is to pass a speaking order after controverting all the facts given by assessee and decide the issue with reasons. Since this was absent in their order, I quash the same and remit the appeal back to the file of AO for fresh adjudication with the above direction. I order accordingly. The appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →