“speaking order”

Natural JusticeReasoned OrderReasoned Order6,856 judgments

The decision most relied on for speaking order is GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. v. ITO (259 ITR 19), cited in 1,349 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on speaking order

GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. v. ITO

259 ITR 19 · 2003 · Supreme Court

1,349

citing judgments

When a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act is issued, the Assessing Officer is bound to furnish reasons for reopening upon the assessee's request and must dispose of the assessee's objections to the notice by passing a speaking order.

Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala

245 ITR 360 · 2000 · Supreme Court

361

citing judgments

An order refusing special leave to appeal to the Supreme Court, whether speaking or non-speaking, does not attract the doctrine of merger, meaning the order under challenge is not substituted.

M/s Sahara India (Farms) v. CIT & Anr.

300 ITR 403 · 2008 · Supreme Court

268

citing judgments

Administrative orders must be consistent with the rules of natural justice.

Kapurchand Shrimal v. CIT

131 ITR 451 · 1981 · Supreme Court

143

citing judgments

Appellate authorities in income-tax proceedings have the jurisdiction and duty to correct all errors of lower authorities. They must remit matters for proper or fresh adjudication and issue appropriate directions to ensure substantial justice, unless expressly forbidden by statute.

Bayer Material Science Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT

382 ITR 333 · 2016 · High Court

citing judgments

Reassessment orders under Section 147/148 are without jurisdiction and invalid if the Assessing Officer fails to dispose of the assessee's objections to the reopening of assessment through a speaking order, as mandated by the GKN Driveshafts procedure.

Kunhayammed and Others v. State of Kerala

119 STC 505 · Reported

citing judgments

A Supreme Court speaking order dismissing a Special Leave Petition (SLP) has two implications: the statement of law contained therein constitutes a declaration of law under Article 141 of the Constitution, and its findings bind the parties and lower authorities.

PCIT v. Tupperware India Pvt. Ltd.

236 Taxmann 494 · 2016 · High Court

citing judgments

The incomplete disposal of an assessee's objections by the Assessing Officer makes the reassessment proceedings invalid. The Assessing Officer must dispose of the objections by a speaking order.

Home Finders Housing Ltd. v. ITO

404 ITR 611 · 2018 · High Court

citing judgments

Non-compliance with the GKN Driveshafts procedure, specifically not passing a speaking order on objections to reassessment before completing the assessment, is a curable procedural irregularity and does not nullify the assessment, particularly if the assessee did not request a speaking order.

Judgments citing speaking order

Keralapura Sanna Errasetty Lathamani, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward No. 4(3)(4), Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 481/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Balram R Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Ghale, Advocate for Standing

Section 144

file of the AO to decide the appeal afresh as per law. The AO shall give proper hearing and pass a reasoned and speaking order as required under the law. The assessee is also directed to comply with notices and attend the proceedings. Hence, the ground of appeal

Mallikarjunaiah Adveeshaiah Hullukunte, Bengaluru vs. Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 6(2)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 355/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Balram R Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian S, JCIT

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 54D

assessee. 10.3 The assessee is directed to cooperate and furnish all required information. The ld. CIT(A) shall pass a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law. Hence, the ground of appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed for statistical purposes. 11. In the result, the appeal is allowed

Mahendra Purushottam Naik Gaunekar, Panaji vs. Income Tax Officer, Panaji

Accordingly. The ground thus stands allowed

ITA 12/PAN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji01 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Rahul Sarda [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Capt. Pradeep Arya [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 253(1)Section 50CSection 50C(1)

aside the impugned proceeding for its remand with a direction to be dealt therewith separately in accordance with law and for passing a speaking order. The ground No 5 thus stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. ITAT-Panaji Page 11 of 16 Mahendra Purushottam Naik Gaunekar ... fresh accordance with law in the light of material, evidences and submission already placed on record by the appellant assessee and pass a speaking order in consonance with s/s (6) of section 250 of the Act. Ordered Accordingly. The ground thus stands allowed for statistical purposes. 17. The appeal thus

Kalongo Desiagro Foundation, Cuttack vs. Income Tax Officer, Exemption, Cuttack

In the result, appeals of the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 138/CTK/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack01 Jul 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: S/Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Rajesh Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Natabar Panda, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ashim Kr Chakraborty, CIT DR

Section 12Section 12ASection 80G

time of hearing, ld AR of the assessee submitted that the ld CIT(E) has rejected the applications without passing a speaking order despite the fact that the appellant trust has fulfilled all statutory requirements and submitted requisite documents. It is submitted that the activities of the trust are genuine

Kalinga Desiagro Foundation, Cuttack vs. Income Tax Officer, Exemption, Cuttack

In the result, appeals of the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 137/CTK/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack01 Jul 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: S/Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Rajesh Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Natabar Panda, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ashim Kr Chakraborty, CIT DR

Section 12Section 12ASection 80G

Academy of Development & Applied Research Foundation Trust (Adarf), Bhubaneswar vs. Commissioner-of-Income Tax(Exemption), Hyderabad

In the result, appeals of the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 134/CTK/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack01 Jul 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: S/ S/Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) Rl Reddy(Kz) & Rajesh Kumar & Assessment Year :2024-25

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Behura and Ananta Narayan SinghbabuFor Respondent: Shri Ashim Kr Chakraborty

Section 80Section 80G

time of hearing, ld AR of the assessee submitted that the ld CIT(E) has rejected the application without passing a speaking order despite the fact that the appellant trust has fulfilled all statutory requirements and submitted requisite documents. It is submitted that the activities of the trust are genuine

Sampark, Sailasree Vihar, Bhubaneswar vs. Commissioner-of-Income Tax(Exemption), Hyderabad

In the result, appeals of the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 133/CTK/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack01 Jul 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: S/ S/Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) Rl Reddy(Kz) & And Rajesh Kumarita No.133/Ctk/2025 Assessment Year :2023-24 Samprak Vs. Cit(Exemption), Hyderabad Cit(Exemption), Hyderabad At: At: 311/4370, 311/4370, Niladri Niladri Vihar, Vihar, Sailashree Vihar, Vihar, Bhubaneswar 751021 Pan/Gir No. Aaajs 3164 R (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri : Shri Sanjay Behura & Ananta Narayan Singhbabu Narayan Singhbabu, Ars Re Revenue By : Shri Ashim Kr Chakraborthy, Ashim Kr Chakraborthy, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 01/07/202 /2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 01/07/202 /2025 O R D E R Per Bench The Present Appeal The Present Appeals Are Directed At The Instance Of Assessee Directed At The Instance Of Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Com The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (E)), Hyderabad Dated 09/12/2024 In Appeal No.Cit(Exemption),Hyd/2024 Cit(Exemption),Hyd/2024-25/12Aa/11704, Rejecting The Application For Grant Of Registration U/S. Rejecting The Application For Grant Of Registration U/S.12Ab 12Ab & Dated 11/12/2024 11/12/2024 In In Appeal Appeal No. No.Cit(Exemption),Hyd/2024 Exemption),Hyd/2024-25/12Aa/11703 Rejecting The Application For Grant Of Registration U/S. 80G Of The Act, Passed Rejecting The Application For Grant Of Registration U/S. 80G Of The Act, Rejecting The Application For Grant Of Registration U/S. 80G Of The Act, For Assessment Year For Assessment Year 2023-24. P A G E 1 | 4 Ita No.133/Ctk/2025 Assessment Year :2023-24

For Appellant: ShriFor Respondent: Shri Ashim Kr Chakraborthy

Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 80G

Sampark, Sailasree Vihar, Bhubaneswar vs. Commissioner-of-Income Tax(Exemption), Hyderabad

ITA 132/CTK/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack01 Jul 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: S/Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Rajesh Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Behura and Ananta Narayan Singhbabu, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Ashim Kr Chakraborthy, CIT DR

Section 12Section 12ASection 80G

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE S/SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT(KZ) AND RAJESH KUMAR

Arya College, Ludhiana, Punjab vs. DCIT, Exemptions Circle 1, Chandigarh

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for

ITA 1132/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri B.M. Monga & Shri Rohit Kaura, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT DR

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)

assessee, carry out independent enquiries against the assessee as well as third parties. After doing so he is required to pass a written and speaking order either accepting the returned income or making additions / disallowances to returned income. 5.4 It may therefore be stated that the power of the appellate

Ketan Himatlal Mehta, Mumbai, Maharashtra vs. NFAC, Not Applicable

ITA 2498/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Smt. Kavita P. Kaushik

Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 68

books of accounts of the Assessee. 3. Order passed by Ld. CIT(Appeal) is bad in law as it is a totally a non-speaking order and as also contrary to the provisions of the Act. Therefore, Appellant prays for the deletion of the addition of Rs.45

Mohit Ramchandani, Jabalpur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 2(1), Jabalpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 8/JAB/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur30 Jun 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri, Nikhil Choudharyassessment Year: 2011-12 Mohit Ramchandani V. Ito Ward-2(1) Lig13, Shiv Nagar Damoh Annexue Building, Naka, Jabalpur-482002. Aayakar Bhawan, Napier Town, Jabalpur-482001. Pan:Auipr4713M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Sapan Usrethe, Adv Respondent By: Shri Alok Bhura, Sr. Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 22 05 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 30 06 2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Sapan Usrethe, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Alok Bhura, Sr. CIT(DR)

Section 147Section 148

deciding the grounds afresh and by giving clear finding on the grounds raised by the assessee by way of speaking order. Needless to say that the assessee would provide all the information which is relevant and necessary for Page 4 of 4 adjudication of grounds of appeal. Grounds raised

Sarswati Bal Kalyan Samiti, Waidhan vs. Income Tax Officer, Exemption, Jabalpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 45/JAB/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur30 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri, Nikhil Choudharyassessment Year: 2018-19 M/S Sarswati Bal Kalyan V. Income Tax Officer, Samiti Mandla Ward, Mandla Waidhan Distt – Singrauli (Mp)- Central Revenue Annexe 486886. Building, Jabalpur- 482001. Pan:Aadas7349Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Dr. Hemant S. Modh, Adv Respondent By: Shri Alok Bhura , Sr. (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 23 05 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 30 06 2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Dr. Hemant S. Modh, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Alok Bhura , Sr. (DR)

Section 119(2)(b)Section 263Section 69A

Counsel for the assessee contended that the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not adjudicating the appeal on merits and has passed a non- speaking order by ignoring the merit-based submission duly filed by the assessee. He also contended that the Ld. CIT(A) has not condoned the delay ... restored back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) with the directions to decide the appeal on merits by passing a speaking order. 4. On the other hand, the Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) opposed the submissions and supported the orders of the lower authorities. 5. Heard, the Ld. Representatives

Bal Krishna Grover, Katni vs. Income Tax Officer 1, Katni

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 55/JAB/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur30 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri, Nikhil Choudharyassessment Year: 2017-18 Balkrishna Grover V. Ito, Katni M/S. Hotel Indra Palace Mohan Room No.2, Ground Floor, Talkies Road, Alfhart Ganj, Ito-1, Income Tax Office, Katni, Madhya Pradesh- Jabalpur Road, Katni, 483501. Madhya Pradesh-483501. Pan:Adbpg3313Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Rahul Bardia, Fca Respondent By: Shri Alok Bhura, Sr. Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 20 05 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 30 06 2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Rahul Bardia, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Alok Bhura, Sr. CIT(DR)

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 69Section 69A

deciding the grounds afresh by giving clear finding on the grounds raised by the assessee by way of a speaking order. Needless to say that the assessee would provide all the information which is relevant and necessary for adjudication of grounds of appeal. Grounds raised in this appeal are allowed

Khanna Automobiles Rewa, Rewa vs. Income Tax Officer, Rewa

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 39/JAB/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur30 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri, Nikhil Choudharyassessment Year: 2014-15 Khanna Automobiles V. Income Tax Officer 01 M/S Khanna Automobile, Ward-1 Bus Stand, Rewa, Madhya Income Tax Office, Kothi Pradesh-486001. Compound, Behind Customer Forum, Rewa- 486001. Pan:Aahfk4140J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Sapan Usrethe, Adv. Respondent By: Shri Alok Bhura, Sr. Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 20 05 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 30 06 2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Sapan Usrethe, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Alok Bhura, Sr. CIT(DR)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

deciding the grounds afresh and by giving clear finding on the grounds raised by the assessee by way of speaking order. Needless to say that the assessee would provide all the information which is relevant and necessary for adjudication of grounds of appeal. Grounds raised in this appeal are allowed

Uday Anant Kamat, Panaji vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -1(1), Panaji

ITA 224/PAN/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji30 Jun 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshalisr

For Appellant: Mr Nishant Thakkar [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Capt. Pradeep Arya [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 153CSection 250Section 251Section 253(1)Section 271A

into legal & meritorious grounds of appeal, we have heard rival party’s common submissions on the ground concerning (ground number 8) not passing a speaking order by the Ld. NFAC and subject to rule 18 (supra) perused material placed on record and considered facts in the light of settled position ... remittance to the file of Ld. NFAC with a direction to deal therewith a fresh in accordance with law and pass a speaking order in consonance with s/s (6) of section 250 of the Act. The ground thus stands allowed for statistical purposes. 13. These appeals in result stands partly

Shri Uday Anant Kamat, Panaji vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 1(1), Panaji

ITA 223/PAN/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji30 Jun 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshalisr

For Appellant: Mr Nishant Thakkar [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Capt. Pradeep Arya [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 153CSection 250Section 251Section 253(1)Section 271A

Uday Anant Kamat, Panaji vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -1(1), Panaji

ITA 140/PAN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji30 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshalisr

For Appellant: Mr Nishant Thakkar [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Capt. Pradeep Arya [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 153CSection 250Section 251Section 253(1)Section 271A

Uday Anant Kamat, Panaji vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 1(1), Panaji

ITA 139/PAN/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji30 Jun 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshalisr

For Appellant: Mr Nishant Thakkar [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Capt. Pradeep Arya [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 153CSection 250Section 251Section 253(1)Section 271A

Shree Akhil Kutch Lohana Mahajan, Bhuj vs. CIT(Exemption), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 9/RJT/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 Jun 2025

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.09/Rjt/2025

For Appellant: Shri R.B. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, CIT-DR

Section 12A(1)(ac)

interest of justice, we restore the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(E) for de novo adjudication and pass a speaking order after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who in turn, is also directed to contest his stand forthwith. Therefore, we deem

Arvindkumar Dayalal Chavda, Rajkot vs. The ITO Ward-2 (2) (3), Rajkot

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 841/RJT/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. A. L. Saini, Am & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 841/Rjt/2024 Assessment Year: (2019-20) Arvindkumar Dayalal Chavda Vs. Ito, Ward – 2(2)(3), Rajkot 3 – Nilay, Maruti Nagar, Opp. New Aayakar Bhavan, Vatiaka, Krishnam Appartment, Airport Road, Race Course Ring Road, Rajkot – 360001 Rajkot-360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abzpc0502D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Kumar Pandya, Ar Respondent By Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 26/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 30/06/2025

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 246Section 250

interest of justice, we restore the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication and pass a speaking order after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who in turn, is also directed to contest his stand forthwith. Therefore, we deem