← 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

Smt. Saroj Dhaka, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward-6(3), Jaipur

ITA 1345/JPR/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Mar 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 234BSection 250

erred in law and on facts in upholding the additions made by the AO, by not passing a speaking order on any of the grounds of appeal filed before him. 4. The ld. AO erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in charging of interest ... books of accounts because her income is from agriculture and not from any business activity. 6. That the impugned order is not a speaking order and as such it is liable to be cancelled. ITA NO. 1345/JP/2019 : 1. Under the facts & circumstance of the case, the order passed

Shri Kailash Chand Gehlot, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward-5(3) Jaipur

ITA 1279/JPR/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Mar 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 234BSection 250

erred in law and on facts in upholding the additions made by the AO, by not passing a speaking order on any of the grounds of appeal filed before him. 4. The ld. AO erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in charging of interest ... books of accounts because her income is from agriculture and not from any business activity. 6. That the impugned order is not a speaking order and as such it is liable to be cancelled. ITA NO. 1345/JP/2019 : 1. Under the facts & circumstance of the case, the order passed

Shri Shrinivas Tripathi, Ajmer vs. Income Tax Officer, Ajmer

ITA 471/JPR/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Mar 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 234BSection 250

erred in law and on facts in upholding the additions made by the AO, by not passing a speaking order on any of the grounds of appeal filed before him. 4. The ld. AO erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in charging of interest ... books of accounts because her income is from agriculture and not from any business activity. 6. That the impugned order is not a speaking order and as such it is liable to be cancelled. ITA NO. 1345/JP/2019 : 1. Under the facts & circumstance of the case, the order passed

Shri Arvind Kumar Sengwa, Ajmer vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2-1, Ajmer

ITA 1123/JPR/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Mar 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 234BSection 250

erred in law and on facts in upholding the additions made by the AO, by not passing a speaking order on any of the grounds of appeal filed before him. 4. The ld. AO erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in charging of interest ... books of accounts because her income is from agriculture and not from any business activity. 6. That the impugned order is not a speaking order and as such it is liable to be cancelled. ITA NO. 1345/JP/2019 : 1. Under the facts & circumstance of the case, the order passed

DCIT Circle-20(1), New Delhi vs. Planetcast Technologies Ltd (Formely Known As Essel Shyam Technologies Ltd.), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the Cross Objection of the assessee is allowed

ITA 8519/DEL/2019[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Mar 2023AY 2004-05

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. K. K. Mishra, Sr. DR
Section 153Section 153(3)Section 153(6)Section 250Section 254Section 260Section 262Section 263Section 264

while not appreciating the fact that there was specific direction from the Hon’ble ITAT to the AO to pass a speaking order after giving a reasonable opportunity to assessee which is covered in the proviso of Section 153(3) i.e. time limit for completion of set aside proceedings

Krushnalal Bhagwandas Patel, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(3)(7), Surat

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

ITA 291/SRT/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat03 Mar 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.291/Srt/2022 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2011-12) (Physical Court Hearing) Krushnalal Bhagwandas Patel, Vs. The Ito, Ward-1(3)(7), 3/36, Amba Krishna Bhavan, Ambaji Surat. Chowk, Rander, Surat – 395005, Gujarat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Adppp8611A (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Bipin Jariwala, Ar Revenue By: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 01/03/2023 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 03/03/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2011-12, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), [In Short ‘Ld. Cit(A)’], National Faceless Appeal Centre (In Short ‘ Nfac’), In Appeal No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/1045270881(1), Dated 07.09.2022, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By Assessing Officer U/S 143(3) R.W.S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Dated 13.12.2018. 2. At The Outset Itself, The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Assailed The Impugned Order By Contending That Assessee Could Not Represent His Case Before Ld. Cit(A) & The Order Being An Ex Parte Order, Stood Vitiated On Account Of Violation Of Principle Of Natural Justice. The Ld. Counsel Submitted That Assessee Did Not Receive Notice From Cit(A) During Appellate Proceedings, Therefore Assessee Could Not Attend Proceeding Before The Ld. Cit(A), Hence, An Another Opportunity To Contest The Appeal Before The First Appellate Authority May Be Granted To The Assessee. Assessment Year. 2011-12 Krushnalal Bhagwandas Patel 3. On The Other Hand, Learned Departmental Representative (Ld. Dr) For The Revenue, Did Not Have Any Objection If The Matter Is Remitted Back To The File Of The Ld. Cit(A) For Fresh Adjudication.

For Appellant: Shri Bipin Jariwala, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

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

ACIT, Central Circle- 27, New Delhi vs. Uflex Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 5776/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: The Date Of Expiry Of The Time Allowed Under Sub-Section (5) Of The Section 153 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. The Ld. Cit (A) Has Erred In Facts & Law Ignoring The Fact That The Provisions Of Section 244A(1)(Aa) & 244A(1A) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Came Into Existence From 01.06.2016 & There Is No Provision For Allowing The Same With Retrospective Effect.

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pramod Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 153Section 244ASection 244A(1)Section 244A(1)(aa)Section 250

That the grounds of appeal are without prejudice to each other.” 3. In this case, ld. CIT (A) passed an extremely laconic and non- speaking order as under :- “ This appeal emanates from the order dated 17/03/2018 passed by DClT, Central Circle-27, New Delhi (hereinafter referred ... 244A(1A) of the IT Act.” 4. Both the parties agreed that the ld. CIT (A) passed a laconic and non-speaking order and should be directed to pass a proper speaking 3 ITA No.5776/Del./2019 order. Accordingly, we remand the file

Mesers Ess Ess Engineering Company Private Limited, Kapurthala vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle IV, Jalandhar

In the result, the captioned appeals are allowed for statistical

ITA 400/ASR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar02 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. S. K. Vatta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Ravinder Mittal, Sr. DR
Section 92E

contention which are placed on record with a request to remand the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to pass speaking order. 8. Per contra, the Ld DR although supported the impugned order, however, he has no objection to the request of the Ld. Counsel ... arriving at the conclusion whether the addition made by AO were justified, in respect of both the assessment year by passing a speaking order. 12. Thus, the issues pertaining to claim of special discount on sales to sister concern to M/S Ess Ess Kay Marketing Company Pvt. Ltd through credit

M/S Ess Ess Kay Engg. Co.P Ltd, Kapurthala vs. Deputy Comissioner of Income Tax, Circle IV, Jalandhar

In the result, the captioned appeals are allowed for statistical

ITA 178/ASR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar02 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. S. K. Vatta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Ravinder Mittal, Sr. DR
Section 92E

contention which are placed on record with a request to remand the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to pass speaking order. 8. Per contra, the Ld DR although supported the impugned order, however, he has no objection to the request of the Ld. Counsel ... arriving at the conclusion whether the addition made by AO were justified, in respect of both the assessment year by passing a speaking order. 12. Thus, the issues pertaining to claim of special discount on sales to sister concern to M/S Ess Ess Kay Marketing Company Pvt. Ltd through credit

Pulikkaparambil George Jacob, Kozhikode vs. ITO Ward 1(1), Kozhikode

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 558/COCH/2022[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin02 Mar 2023AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora (Accountant Member), Shri Sandeep Gosain (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri V.M. Veeramani, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2Section 2(47)Section 2(47)(v)Section 2(47)(vi)Section 53A

finally decide the 7 | P a g e Pulikkaparambil George Jacob v. ITO matter/s, issuing definite findings of fact and law, per a speaking order and after hearing both the parties before him. The issue of deduction u/s. 54-F shall also be adjudicated upon in view of the Board

Sri.Mohammed Haris, Thrissur vs. Pr CIT, Bangalore

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

ITA 58/COCH/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin02 Mar 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora (Accountant Member), Shri Sandeep Gosain (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri B. Mohan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Prasanth V.K., CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 263

National Relief Fund by 31/3/2023, agreed to by Shri Mohan. Subject thereto, the impugned order is set aside for being made afresh, per a speaking order, in accordance with law, and after giving a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee, who shall, in case of any change, suitably amend

M/S Maruti Nandan Food Products Pvt Ltd, Patna vs. ITO, Ward- 2(1), Patna

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

ITA 124/PAT/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Patna28 Feb 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Dinesh Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Rinku Singh, CIT, DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(b)Section 68

being heard be given. 7.4. Since the matter is restored to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for meritorious adjudication by passing a speaking order in terms of our observations made hereinabove, we are not expressing any views on the merits of the case so as to limit the appellate ... matter by exercising the powers vested u/s. 251 of the Act and following the procedure prescribed u/s. 250 of the Act, by passing a speaking order for the same. 8. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 28th

Nuray Realtech Private Limited, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 18(4), New Delhi

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed for

ITA 7275/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Ld. Ao & Ld. Cit(A). Thus, The Additions Made By Ao Are Erroneous & Bad In Law.

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

hearing before us, the Ld. Authorized Representative (“AR) for assessee submitted that the impugned appellate order passed by Ld. CIT(A) was not a speaking order in respect of points for determination before the Ld. CIT(A), having regard to the grounds of appeal filed by the appellant assessee ... erred in dismissing the assessee’s appeal in limine; and also, that Ld. CIT(A) was duty bound to pass a speaking order on merits. He further submitted that the impugned appellate order should be set aside and Ld. CIT(A) should be directed to pass a fresh order

Mohammed Moshin, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad

ITA 35/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2023AY 2016-17
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 69A

facts and circumstances of the present appeal before us, we are of the view, that the Ld. CIT(A) should have passed a speaking order explaining why he did not admit additional evidences. (C.1) In view of the foregoing; and in the facts and circumstances of the present appeal before ... restore the issues in dispute to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with the direction to pass a speaking order regarding admissibility or otherwise of the additional evidences. If the Ld. CIT(A) decides to admit the additional evidences in pursuance of this order, then he is further directed

Sabka Development Associated, New Delhi vs. CIT(Exemption), Chandigarh

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 7305/DEL/2018[-]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2023

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Ramesh Goyal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 80G

appreciating the facts of the case and providing proper opportunity of being heard. (iii) That the learned CIT(E) has failed to pass a speaking order. ITA No. 7304 & 7305/Del/2018 2 Sabka Development Associated (iv) That the learned CIT (E) has failed to appreciate various submissions made before ... appreciating the facts of the case and providing proper opportunity of being heard. (iii) That the learned CIT(E) has failed to pass a speaking order. (iv) That the learned CIT (E) has failed to appreciate various submissions made before him and therefore the order

Sabka Development Associated, New Delhi vs. CIT(Exemption), Chandigarh

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 7304/DEL/2018[-]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2023

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Ramesh Goyal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 80G

appreciating the facts of the case and providing proper opportunity of being heard. (iii) That the learned CIT(E) has failed to pass a speaking order. ITA No. 7304 & 7305/Del/2018 2 Sabka Development Associated (iv) That the learned CIT (E) has failed to appreciate various submissions made before ... appreciating the facts of the case and providing proper opportunity of being heard. (iii) That the learned CIT(E) has failed to pass a speaking order. (iv) That the learned CIT (E) has failed to appreciate various submissions made before him and therefore the order

Shri Abdul Ahad Dar, Srinagr vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-3 (5), Baramula

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

ITA 194/ASR/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar28 Feb 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Ms. Sunfat Ashraf Wani, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Ravinder Mittal, Sr. DR

consider it deem fit to remand back to the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate afresh by passing a speaking order after considering the written submission of the assessee by granting adequate opportunity of being heard to him in view of principles of natural justice

Shri Rachhpal Singh Son of Shri Tarlok Singh, Ferozepur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 3 (1), Ferozepur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 166/ASR/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar28 Feb 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Jawsinder Singh, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Ravinder Mittal, Sr. DR
Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

dismissed the appeal of the assessee filed against the levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) vide order dated 30.03.2018 by passing a non speaking order and ignoring the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in Special Leave to Appeal (CC No. 11485/2016) arising out of impugned final judgment

Shri Onkar Singh, Jalandhar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-3, Hoshiarpur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 232/ASR/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar28 Feb 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Y. K. Sud, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Ravinder Mittal, Sr. DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

dismissed the appeal of the assessee filed against the levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) vide order dated 30.03.2018 by passing a non speaking order and ignoring the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in Special Leave to Appeal (CC No. 11485/2016) arising out of impugned final judgment

Deputy Commisioner of Income Tax, Rajahmahendravaram vs. Andhra Paper Limited, Rajahmahendravaram

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical

ITA 189/VIZ/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam28 Feb 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos. 162/Viz/2022 & 189/Viz/2022 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. M/S. Andhra Paper Limited Tax, Circle-1, (M/S. International Paper Rajamahendravaram. Appm Ltd), Sri Ram Nagar, Rajamahendravaram. Pan: Aact 8849 D (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) Co Nos: 22 & 23/Viz/2022 (In आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos. 162/Viz/2022 & 189/Viz/2022) ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14) M/S. Andhra Paper Limited Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of (M/S. International Paper Appm Income Tax, Circle-1, Ltd), Rajamahendravaram. Sri Ram Nagar, Rajamahendravaram. Pan: Aact 8849 D (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/ Assessee By : Sri K. Chakrapani ""याथ"क"ओरसे/ Revenue By : Sri Mn Murthy Naik, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: Sri K. ChakrapaniFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 35D

mater back to the file of the Ld. AO to verify the details of expenses and compute the disallowance, if any, by passing a speaking order on this issue. Accordingly, this ground raised by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes. 9. With respect to Ground No.3 disallowance of sundry ... with a specific direction to examine the sundry creditors name wise, year wise and decide the case accordingly pass a speaking order on this issue, by providing one more opportunity to the assessee. Therefore, this ground raised by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes. 11. With respect to Ground