← All Phrases

“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
89
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
68
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
58
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
56
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

M/S. Slk Software Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Special Range-6N, Bangalore

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

ITA 933/BANG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Bharath L, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT (DR)
Section 14A

decision on those points, and  Record the reasoning behind such a decision.  17.2 This statutory requirement ensures that an appellate order shall be a "speaking order", reflecting due consideration of the issues raised and providing clarity on the conclusions drawn. In holding so, we draw support and guidance from ... erred in facts and in law in summarily dismissing the assessee's appeals for the assessment years under consideration, by passing a non-speaking order, without mentioning the various grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in his appellate order and without discussing the merits of the case. Therefore

M/S. Slk Software Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Special Range-6, Bangalore

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

ITA 932/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Bharath L, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT (DR)
Section 14A

decision on those points, and  Record the reasoning behind such a decision.  17.2 This statutory requirement ensures that an appellate order shall be a "speaking order", reflecting due consideration of the issues raised and providing clarity on the conclusions drawn. In holding so, we draw support and guidance from ... erred in facts and in law in summarily dismissing the assessee's appeals for the assessment years under consideration, by passing a non-speaking order, without mentioning the various grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in his appellate order and without discussing the merits of the case. Therefore

Dileep Kumar Sah, Siwan vs. ITO Ward2(3), Siwan

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 367/PAT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna30 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.367/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Dileep Kumar Sah……………….....…..…………………....Appellant Makhdoom Sarai, Turha Toli, Siwan, Bihar-841226. [Pan: Gvnps8999L] Vs. Ito, Ward-2(3), Siwan....….…….…............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ashwani Kumar, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 28, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 30, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 29.09.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. At The Outset, The Registry Has Informed That There Is A Delay Of 134 Days In Filing The Present Appeal. The Ld. Ar Of The Assessee Filed An Application For Condonation Of Delay Stating Reasons For Such Delay. After Considering The Application, We Find Reasonable Cause For Such Delay. We, Therefore, Condone The Delay In Filing The Appeal & Adjudicate The Appeal On Merits Of The Case. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & Declared His Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2017-18 At

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 69A

fresh adjudication after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee to present his case and to pass a speaking order. We also direct the assessee to strictly comply with the notices issued by the ld. CIT(A) and furnish all relevant documents to substantiate his claim

Infospectrum India Private Limited, Nagpur vs. Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Nagpur

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

ITA 407/NAG/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur30 Jan 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durgarao & Shrik.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Kishore P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

basis of which the learned CIT(A) condone the delay as may deem fit and dispose off the matter on merits by issuing a speaking order. 5. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 30/01/2025

Geeta Krushna Mahila Urban Credit Co Op Soc Limited Nagpur, Nagpur vs. ITO Ward 4(4), Nagpur

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee IS allowed for statistical purposes, subject to the condition as stated in Para–6 above

ITA 246/NAG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur30 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Suren DuragkarFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

file of the Assessing Officer and direct him to adjudicate the appeal afresh on merit and in accordance with law. Before passing speaking orders, the Assessing Officer shall provide adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It is also directed that the assessee should not seek adjournment without there

Tijaria Polypipes Limited, Jaipur vs. DCIT Cirlce 4, Jaipur

ITA 616/JPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Jan 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anoop Singh, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

filed the objections for issuance of notice u/s 148 after the receipt of reasons but the Id. AO has not passed any speaking order rejecting the objections, which is contrary to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of GKN Driveshaft (1) Ltd. reported ... direction of Supreme Court in GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. v. Income Tax Officer [2002] 125 Taxman 963 regarding disposing of objections by passing a speaking order, would not make reassessment order void ab initio. Relevant para of the order are as under- "19. The core question is as to whether

Vinaykumar Ram Kamal Pandey, Bharuch Gujarat vs. Asst. Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 1482/AHD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Jan 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Smt. Annapurna Gupta

For Appellant: Shri Krutarth Desai, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.P. Srivastav, Sr.DR
Section 10Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250(5)Section 89(1)

Learned CIT (Appeals) grossly erred on facts and in law in dismissing the appeal without adjudicating the ground regarding non speaking order of the Learned AO passed us 143(1). 4 Section 10 10AA (ii) wrongly disallowed, The Learned CIT(A) has grossly erred in law and is not justified

Stepping Stones Infocom Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 5(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2246/KOL/2024[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Jan 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 131Section 143(2)Section 68

hereinabove. Considering these facts, we do not find any infirmity in the order of Ld. CIT(A) which is otherwise a very reasoned and speaking order passed after discussing various factual details about each and every subscribers in para 4.6 such their source of investments, creditworthiness , etc. In our opinion ... directors of the share subscribing companies to make the addition which is not correct. The ld CIT(A) has passed a very reasoned and speaking order discussing all facts and satisfaction of all the ingredients of section 68 of the Act while allowing the relief as stated above. Under these

Mr. Kallappa Shadakshari, Tiptur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Tiptur

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

ITA 108/BANG/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Prakash Chand Yadavassessment Years: 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri M.R Venkatesh Babu, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Neha Sahay, JCIT

fresh adjudication. 10. Conversely, the Learned Departmental Representative (DR) argued that the CIT(A) had provided a detailed and reasoned finding in a speaking order after considering the assessee’s submissions. As such, the DR contended that there was no justification for setting aside the CIT(A)'s order

Income Tax Officer, Kautaliya Bhavan, Bkc vs. Rajnish Bharti HUF, Darukhana

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 4378/MUM/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh ()

For Appellant: Mr. C.V. JainFor Respondent: Mrs. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

noticee is entitled to file objections to issuance of notice and the Assessing Officer is bound to dispose of the same by passing a speaking order. In the instant case, as the reasons have been disclosed in these proceedings, the Assessing Officer has to dispose of the objections, if filed ... passing a speaking order, before proceeding with the assessment in respect of the abovesaid five assessment years" 12. Heard learned counsel for the parties at length. 13. Reference at the very outset can be made to section 148 A (b) of Act 1961, which reads as under:- "148A. The Assessing

Income Tax Officer 41(3)(3), Bkc vs. Rajnish Bharti HUF, Darukhana

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 4377/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh ()

For Appellant: Mr. C.V. JainFor Respondent: Mrs. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

noticee is entitled to file objections to issuance of notice and the Assessing Officer is bound to dispose of the same by passing a speaking order. In the instant case, as the reasons have been disclosed in these proceedings, the Assessing Officer has to dispose of the objections, if filed ... passing a speaking order, before proceeding with the assessment in respect of the abovesaid five assessment years" 12. Heard learned counsel for the parties at length. 13. Reference at the very outset can be made to section 148 A (b) of Act 1961, which reads as under:- "148A. The Assessing

Rajnish Bharti HUF, Mumbai vs. The Income Tax Officer 20(3)(1), Mumbai, Lalbaug

In the result, both the appeals of the In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed assessee are dismissed whereas appeals of the Revenue are allowed

ITA 3941/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh ()

For Appellant: Mrs. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Mr. C.V. Jain
Section 143(3)Section 148

Assessing Officer is bound to dispose of the same by the Assessing Officer is bound to dispose of the same by passing a speaking order. In the instant case, as the reasons passing a speaking order. In the instant case, as the reasons passing a speaking order. In the instant ... Officer has to dispose of the objections, if filed, by passing a Officer has to dispose of the objections, if filed, by passing a speaking order, before proceeding with the assessment in aking order, before proceeding with the assessment in aking order, before proceeding with the assessment in respect

Rajnish Bharti HUF, Mumbai vs. The Income Tax Officer 20(3)(1), Mumbai, Lalbaug

In the result, both the appeals of the In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed assessee are dismissed whereas appeals of the Revenue are allowed

ITA 3912/MUM/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh ()

For Appellant: Mrs. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Mr. C.V. Jain
Section 143(3)Section 148

Assessing Officer is bound to dispose of the same by the Assessing Officer is bound to dispose of the same by passing a speaking order. In the instant case, as the reasons passing a speaking order. In the instant case, as the reasons passing a speaking order. In the instant ... Officer has to dispose of the objections, if filed, by passing a Officer has to dispose of the objections, if filed, by passing a speaking order, before proceeding with the assessment in aking order, before proceeding with the assessment in aking order, before proceeding with the assessment in respect

Karina Kunjana Kapoor, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-19, New Delhi

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

ITA 3553/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Amitabh Shuklam/S. Ashirvad Steels & Alloys Vs. Income Tax Officer, Pvt. Ltd, Ward-1(1), 8Th K. M. Stone, Meerut Road, Muzaffarnagar, Muzaffar Nagar, Up Up (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aadca4543J

For Appellant: Shri Ankit Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 68

assessee through its grounds of appeal supra stands remitted back to the Ld. AO for fresh adjudication de novo by passing a speaking order and in accordance with law. To the extent the order of lower authorities on this issue stands set aside. The Ld. AO shall give opportunities

Chandra Prakash Goplani, Bengaluru vs. ITO 2(1)(1), Agra

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

ITA 166/AGR/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Agra29 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: : Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2012-13

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 253(3)

obligated to pass order in compliance with the provisions of section 250(6), as ld CIT(A) is required to pass reasoned and speaking order on merits in accordance with law. The appellate order passed by ld. CIT(A) is subject to further appeal with ITAT u/s 253. The appellate

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-Shillong, Shillong vs. The Meghalaya Cooperative Apex Bank Limited, Shillong

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is allowed and the Cross

ITA 50/GTY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati29 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Sri Manomohan Das & Sri Rakesh Mishra

Section 10(26)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 36Section 40

intended to give to the assessee and admit any fresh evidence, if so required, under Rule 46A of the Rules and thereby pass a speaking order. 6. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed. 6.1 Hence, ground nos. 1, 2 & 3 are allowed and the order

Multipurpose Association for Reciprocal Service, Puri vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 36/CTK/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack29 Jan 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalassessment Year : 2022-2023

For Appellant: S/Shri Prakash Kumar Jena, Dr. Sanjay Kr. Behura &For Respondent: Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT
Section 80Section 80G

order has been passed in November, 2024. A perusal of the para 3 shows that the order of rejection is not a speaking order. The provision of the Act requires that the reasons be given in details while application is being rejected. This being so, in the interest of justice

Human Development Centre, Khorda vs. ITO, Exemption Ward, Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 34/CTK/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack29 Jan 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalassessment Year : 2024-25

For Appellant: S/Shri Prakash Kumar Jena, Dr. Sanjay Kr. Behura &For Respondent: Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT
Section 80Section 80G

submitted that all the information sought by the ld CIT(E) had been provided. It was the further submission that a non- speaking order has been passed whereby the assessee is unable to identify the reasons as to why the exemption has not been granted. It was the prayer that ... provisions. He submission that he had no objection if the issue is restored to the file of the ld CI(E) for passing a speaking order and reconsideration of the materials available. 5. We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the order of the ld CIT(E) shows

Society for Community Rehabilitation, Rayagada vs. ITO, Exemption, Cuttack

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 33/CTK/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack29 Jan 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalassessment Year : 2024-25 Society Society For For Community Community Vs. Cit(Exemptions), Cit(Exemptions), Rehabilitation, At Rehabilitation, At-Anjipeta, Po: Hyderabad Isco, Ps/Dist: Rayagada Isco, Ps/Dist: Rayagada Pan/Gir No. No.Abgas 3168 M (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : S/Shri Prakash Kumar Jena, Dr. Sanjay Kr. Assessee By Prakash Kumar Jena, Dr. Sanjay Kr. Behura & Ananta Narayan Singhbabu, Advs Revenue By : Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, Cit : Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 29/01/20 2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 29/01/20 025 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Against The Order Of The Ld Cit(Exemptions), Cit(Exemptions), Hyderabad Hyd Dated 22..11.2024 In Application No.Cit(Exp), Hyd/2024 Cit(Exp), Hyd/2024-25/12Aa/11481 For The Assessment Year Essment Year 2024-25 Rejecting The Application For Registration U/S. 80 G Rejecting The Application For Registration U/S. 80 G Of The Act. Of The Act.

For Appellant: S/Shri Prakash Kumar Jena, Dr. Sanjay KrFor Respondent: Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT
Section 80Section 80G

submitted that all the information sought by the ld CIT(E) had been provided. It was the further submission that a non- speaking order has been passed whereby the assessee is unable to identify the reasons as to why the exemption has not been granted. It was the prayer that ... provisions. He submission that he had no objection if the issue is restored to the file of the ld CI(E) for passing a speaking order and reconsideration of the materials available. 5. We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the order of the ld CIT(E) shows

Krushi Sampark, Baro vs. Income Tax Officer, Exemption Cuttack

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 21/CTK/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack29 Jan 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalita Nos.20 & 21/Ctk/2025 Assessment Year : 2023-24

For Appellant: S/Shri Prakash Kumar Jena, Dr. Sanjay Kr. Behura &For Respondent: Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT
Section 12Section 80

submitted that all the information sought by the ld CIT(E) had been provided. It was the further submission that a non- speaking order has been passed whereby the assessee is unable to identify the reasons as to why the exemption has not been granted. It was the prayer that ... provisions. He submission that he had no objection if the issue is restored to the file of the ld CI(E) for passing a speaking order and reconsideration of the materials available. P a g e 2 | 4 ITA Nos.20 & 21/CTK/2025 Assessment Year : 2023-24 5. We have considered