Del. HC: Assessing Officer to Decide Whether Case is Fit for Issuance of Notice u/s 148 of IT Act  ||  Delhi HC: Under Arbitration Act, Date of Receipt of Corrected Award Would be Taken as Disposal Date  ||  MP HC: Punishment of Termination of Employee for Single Clerical Mistake ‘Excessive’  ||  Ker. HC: Can Extend Principle of Res Ipsa Loquitur to Criminal Cases Only for Assessment of Evidence  ||  P&H HC: While Adju. Pre-Arrest Bail Plea Manner in Which Accused is Arraigned in FIR is Important  ||  P&H HC: While Adju. Pre-Arrest Bail Plea Manner in Which Accused is Arraigned in FIR is Important  ||  Guj. HC: Can’t Use Nylon Threads, Cotton Threads With Glass Coating for Flying Kites  ||  Tel. HC: Parent Who is Lawful Guardian Taking Child from Custody of Other Parent is Not Kidnapping  ||  Mad. HC: Surplus Funds of Temple Cannot be used to Construct Shopping Complexes  ||  Del. HC: For Filing Additional WS After, Comm. Court Act Doesn't Prevent Appl. of Order 8 Rule 9 CPC    

Smt. Heenaben Maheshbhai Gadhethariya vs. The Ito - (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) (07 Sep 2023)

As per Section 250 (5) of IT Act, order of the Commissioner of Income Tax shall be in writing and shall state the points for determination, and the decision thereon and the reason for the decision

MANU/IR/0149/2023

Direct Taxation

Present appeal has been filed by the Assessee against order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), under Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Issue involved in present case is whether the CIT(A) has erred in passing the Appellate Order under Section 250 of IT Act without providing adequate Opportunity of being heard/ short hearing Notices and thereby violated the principle of Audi alteram partem.

It appears that the learned CIT(A) has missed to consider the details furnished by the assessee while passing appellate order and outrightly accepted the finding of the AO. Section 250(5) clearly provides the order of the learned CIT(A) disposing of the appeal shall be in writing and shall state the points for determination, and the decision thereon and the reason for the decision. Therefore, the impugned order of the learned CIT(A) is not in consonance with provisions of Section 250(5) of the Act, which require the learned CIT(A) to pass a speaking order. No doubt on the face of the record, it suggests that the assessee had furnished the details with regard to the dispute and filed written submissions, however, the learned CIT(A) did not consider the same while passing the impugned order.

Thus, based on the fact that impugned order was passed without considering written submissions filed by the assessee and the material available on record, therefore, in the interest of justice, the Learned CIT(A) is directed to re-adjudicate the case on merit after providing fair opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

Tags : ASSESSMENT   ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY   HEARING  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2025 - All Rights Reserved