JCIT (OSD), New Delhi V. Sh. Harish Bahl, New Delhi

ITA 4891/DEL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 87111 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 4 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-03-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 12-03-2015
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 04-11-2011
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RIS GILL

Judgement Text

ITA NO.4891/DEL/2011 AY: 2008-09 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH `C NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.V. MEHROTRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.NO.4891/DEL/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 JCIT(OSD), VS HARISH BAHL, CIRCLE-9(1), D-119, LAJPAT NAGAR-I C.R. BUILDING, NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. (PAN: AAHPB3859K) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI R.I.S. GILL, CIT DR RESPONDENT BY :SHRI ANIL BHALLA, CA DATE OF HEARING: 12.3.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: O R D E R PER CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER THE ABOVE APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A)-XII, NEW DELHI DATED 27.07.2011 IN APPE AL NO. 149/10-11 FOR AY 2008-09. 2. THE REVENUE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS IN THIS APPEAL:- '1. THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED, IN LAW AND ON THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN DIRECTING THE AO TO ASSESS THE INCOME EARNE D BY THE ASSESSEE ON SALE OF SHARES OF QUASSAR MEDIA (P) LTD . UNDER THE HEAD 'LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN' INSTEAD OF THE HEAD ' BUSINESS' AS ASSESSED BY THE AO.' ITA NO.4891/DEL/2011 AY: 2008-09 2 '2. THE LD. C!T(A) ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS OF TH E CASE IN DIRECTING THE AO TO SET OFF THE LOSS SUFFERED BY TH E ASSESSEE ON SALE OF SHARES OF SIEMENS AND MUTUAL FUNDS AGAINST THE INCOME EARNED BY THE ASSESSEE ON SALE OF SHARES OF QUASAR MEDIA (P) LTD. 3. WE HAVE HEARD ARGUMENT OF BOTH THE SIDES AND CAREFU LLY PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD INTER ALIA ASSES SMENT ORDER OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND THE PAPER BOOK OF THE ASSES SEE SPREAD OVER 93 PAGES. 4. LD. DR POINTED OUT THE CONCLUSION OF THE CIT(A) ON THE IMPUGNED ISSUE AND SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(A) HAS ALLOWED THE APPEA L OF THE ASSESSEE IN A CRYPTIC MANNER WITHOUT ASSIGNING AND ADDRESSING ANY REASON FOR ADJUDICATING THE SAME IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. LD. DR FURTHER POI NTED OUT THAT ON GROUND NO. 1 AND 2 BEFORE THE CIT(A), THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHOR ITY HAS REPRODUCED CONTENTIONS AND CONCLUSION OF THE AO ALONG WITH FACTS AND SUBMI SSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AND AT THE END WITHOUT ADJUDICATION THE ISSUE HAS BEEN DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY PASSING A SLIPSHOD AND BRIEF ORDER. LD . DR LASTLY PRAYED THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) MAY BE SET ASIDE BY RESTORING T HAT OF THE AO. ALTERNATIVELY, LD. DR ALSO SUBMITTED THAT IF IT IS FOUND JUST AND PROPER, THEN THE CASE MAY BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF CIT(A) FOR A FRESH ADJUDICA TION OF FIRST APPEAL. 5. LD. AR VEHEMENTLY CONTENDED THAT WHEN THE AO IS FRAMING ASSESSMENT ARBITRARILY WITHOUT AFFORDING DUE OPPORTUNITY OF HE ARING FOR THE ASSESSEE AND THE CONCLUSION OF THE AO IS NOT SUSTAINABLE, THEN THE C IT(A) WAS RIGHT IN DISMISSING ITA NO.4891/DEL/2011 AY: 2008-09 3 THE ACTION AND CONCLUSION OF THE AO IN THE ASSESSME NT ORDER WHILE GRANTING RELIEF FOR THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, LD. AR FAIRLY AC CEPTED THAT THE CIT(A) HAS ALLOWED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE BY PASSING A BRI EF ORDER WITHOUT ANY PROPER ADJUDICATION. LD. AR FINALLY SUBMITTED THAT IF IT IS FOUND JUST AND PROPER TO RESTORE THE FIRST APPEAL TO THE FILE OF CIT(A), THE N THE ASSESSEE HAS NO SERIOUS OBJECTION TO THAT. 6. ON CAREFUL CONSIDERATION OF ABOVE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE SIDES AND VIGILANT PERUSAL OF THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) WE NOTE THAT THE CIT(A) HAS ALLOWED RELIEF FOR THE ASSESSEE WITH A BRIEF AND CRYPTIC FI NDING ON ALL THE ISSUES WHICH DO NOT DEMONSTRATE THAT THE CIT(A) HAS ADDRESSED AND A DJUDICATED ALL THE ISSUES/GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE HER. UNDER THESE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, WE MAY POINT OUT THAT THE JUDICIAL A ND QUASI-JUDICIAL AUTHORITIES ARE DUTY BOUND TO ADDRESS AND ADJUDICATE ALL THE IS SUES WHICH HAVE BEEN RAISED BEFORE IT AND THE AUTHORITIES ARE ALSO DUTY BOUND T O ASSIGN REASONING AND FINDING TO SUPPORT THEIR CONCLUSION WHICH MAY BE A MATTER O F REVIEW, REVISION OR APPEAL BEFORE ANY HIGHER FORUM IN THE HIERARCHY. IN THE P RESENT CASE, THE CIT(A) HAS MISERABLY FAILED TO COMPLY WITH DUTIES INCUMBENT UP ON HER AS PER WELL-ACCEPTED PRINCIPLES OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS AND, THEREFORE, THE IMPUGNED B RIEF, CRYPTIC AND SLIPSHOD ORDER PASSED WITHOUT APPLICATION OF MIND IS NOT SUSTAINABLE. TH US, THE IMPUGNED ORDER IS SET ASIDE AND IN VIEW OF THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE SIDES, WE FIND IT JUST AND PROPER TO RESTORE ALL THE ITA NO.4891/DEL/2011 AY: 2008-09 4 GROUNDS OF THE ASSESSEE RAISED BEFORE THE CIT(A) TO THE FILE OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY FOR PROPER ADJUDICATION AFTER AFFORDING D UE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING FOR THE ASSESSEE AND WITHOUT BEING INFLUENCED WITH THE EARLIER APPELLATE ORDER AND OUR OBSERVATIONS IN THIS REGARD. ACCORDINGLY, GROU ND NO. 1 AND 2 OF THE REVENUE ARE DEEMED TO BE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS ALLO WED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 18.3 .2015. SD/- SD/- (S. V. MEHROTRA) (CHANDRAMOHAN GARG) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DT. 18TH MARCH 2015 GS COPY FORWARDED TO:- 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. C.I.T.(A) 4. C.I.T. 5. DR BY ORDER ASSTT.REGISTRAR