Sh. Laxman Singh Chahar, .R. Compounder ki Gali, Devipura, Sikar V. ITO, Ward-4, Sikar

ITA 434/JPR/2022

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Shri Laxman Singh Chahar against the order of the CIT(A), which dismissed his appeal without considering the merits. The assessee had filed an appeal for the assessment year 2010-11, which was dismissed by the CIT(A) on 23-11-2022. The assessee contended that the CIT(A) did not consider his submission dated 30-07-2021 while dismissing the appeal. The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) failed to provide a reasoned decision as mandated by Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and thus restored the matter to the CIT(A) for a comprehensive re-evaluation.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 132489 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-03-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 14-02-2023
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 15-12-2022
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

vk;djvihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqjU;k;ihB] t;iqj IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR JhlaanhixkslkbZ]U;kf;dlnL; ,oaJhjkBksMdeys'kt;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;djvihy la-@ITA No. 434/JP/2022 fu/kZkj.ko"kZ@Assessment Year :2010-11 Shri Laxman Singh Chahar B.R. Compounder Ki Gali Devipura, Sikar cuke Vs. The ITO Ward-4 Sikar LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ACCPG 2501 J vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Shri P.C. Parwal , CA jktLo dh vksj ls@Revenue by: Mrs. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@Date of Hearing : 15/02/2023 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 28 /03/2023 vkns'k@ORDER PER: SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against order of the ld. CIT(A) dated 23-11-2022, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [ hereinafter referred to as (NFAC) ] for the assessment year 2010-11 wherein the assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal. ‘’1. The ld. CIT(A), NFAC has erred on facts and in law in dismissing the appeal filed by the assessee without considering the 2 ITA NO. 434/JP/2022 SHRI LAXMAN SINGH CHAHAR VS ITO,WARD 4, SIKAR submission dated 30-07-2021 filed by the assessee and thereby not deciding the grounds of appeal on merit. 2. That once the ld. CIT(A), NFAC has not decided the grounds of appeal on merit even when the written submission alongwith the paper book was filed before it, Hon’ble ITAT is prayed to decide the appeal on merit instead of setting aside the matter to ld. CIT(A). 2.1 At the outset of the hearing, the Bench noted that the ld. AR of the assessee has taken a specific ground that ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in dismissing the appeal filed by the assessee without considering the submission dated 30-07-2021 filed by the assessee and thereby not deciding the grounds of appeal on merit. 2.2 On the other hand, the ld. DR appearing on behalf of the Revenue supported the order of the ld. CIT(A). 2.3 We have heard both the parties and perused the materials available on record including the order passed by the ld. CIT(A). While turning to the impugned order dated 23-11-2022 passed by the ld. CIT(A), we noticed that the ld. CIT(A) had not adjudicated upon the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee specifically on merits. The only reason mentioned by the ld. CIT(A) while dismissing the appeal of the assessee is that ‘’written submission dated 30-7-2021 available on record is not persuasive enough to delete the addition disputed in this appeal.’’ It is noted 3 ITA NO. 434/JP/2022 SHRI LAXMAN SINGH CHAHAR VS ITO,WARD 4, SIKAR that only by stroke of pen, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. In our view, the ld. CIT(A) was under an obligation to decide the grounds appeal raised by the assessee by passing a well reasoned and speaking order which has not been done by the ld. CIT(A) in the present case. Even otherwise the dictum of Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 specifically states that the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) disposing of the appeal shall state the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reason for the decision. Therefore, looking to the facts of the present case, we find that the ld. CIT(A) has passed the impugned order in contravention of the specific direction given in Section 250(6) of the Act. Even otherwise, the reasoning for reaching to a conclusion is the foundation and hard bit of an order and in case conclusion is drawn without recording specific reasons then in our view the said order of ld. CIT(A) is not sustainable in the eyes of law. With these observations, we are of the view that the matter needs to be re-looked at the end of the ld. CIT(A) and ld.CIT(A) is under an obligation to pass a well reasoned speaking order taking into consideration the grounds raised by the assessee before him. Thus, we restore the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(A) with the direction to pass a well reasoned speaking order by providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 4 ITA NO. 434/JP/2022 SHRI LAXMAN SINGH CHAHAR VS ITO,WARD 4, SIKAR 3.0 In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 28/03/2023. Sd/- Sd/- ¼jkBksMdeys'kt;UrHkkbZ ½ ¼lanhi xkslkbZ½ (Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhai) (Sandeep Gosain) ys[kklnL;@Accountant Member U;kf;dlnL;@Judicial Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 28/03/2023 *Mishra vkns'k dh izfrfyfivxzsf’kr@Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant- Shri Laxman Singh Chahar,Sikar 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- The ITO, Ward-4, Sikar 3. vk;djvk;qDr@ The ld CIT 4. foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k] vk;djvihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj@DR, ITAT, Jaipur 5. xkMZQkbZy@ Guard File (ITA No. 434/JP/2022) vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order, lgk;diathdkj@Asstt. Registrar