SRI RAJESH PRADHAN,JALPAIGURI vs. ITO, WD-1(3), JALPAIGURI, JALPAIGURI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) failed in its duty to pass a speaking order after considering the assessee's facts. Consequently, the CIT(A)'s order was quashed and the appeal was remitted back for fresh adjudication.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal arose from an order of the CIT(A) which was found to be cryptic and non-speaking. The CIT(A) had not discussed the merits of the case or provided any reasons for its decision.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) passed a speaking order and properly adjudicated the appeal. The adequacy of the CIT(A)'s order in addressing the assessee's submissions.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH: KOLKATA
Before: Shri Mahavir Singh, JM]
This appeal by assessee is arising out of order of CIT(A), Jalpaiguri vide Appeal No. 30/Jal/CIT(A)/Jal/2013-14 dated 18.09.2015. Assessment was framed by ITO, Wd-1(3), Jalpaiguri u/s. 147/144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for Assessment Year 2008-09 vide his order dated 22.03.2013. 2. At the time of hearing, I have gone through the order of CIT(A) and seen that the order passed by him is cryptic and non-speaking. There is no iota of merits discussed in his order. The duty of the CIT(A) 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 his file for fresh adjudication with the above direction. I order accordingly. The appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court. (Mahavir Singh) Judicial Member Dated : 22nd February, 2016 Jd. Sr. P.S Copy of the order forwarded to:
Appellant – Shri Rajesh Pradhan, Raja Tea Estate, Post Malbazar, District Jalpaiguri, Pin- 735221. 2. Respondent – ITO, Ward-1(3), Jalpaiguri.
CIT(A) , Jalpaiguri
CIT , Jalpaiguri
DR, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata /, By order, Asstt.
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Atiquiddin Shaikh vs. The State Of Madhya PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 16 Oct 2026
- Mr. Gurudev Singh vs. Kotak Mahindra BankMadhya Pradesh · 16 Oct 2026
- Venkadeswara Grill Works vs. The Joint Commissioner (St)Madras · 16 Oct 2026
- Mufti Clothing And Co vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Madras · 16 Oct 2026
- U Days Garments vs. The Adjudication OfficerMadras · 16 Oct 2026