DCIT, Central Circle, Sambalpur V. M/s. Maikal Breweries Pvt. Ltd., Bolangir

ITSSA 139/CTK/2018

AI Insights

The case involves appeals by the revenue against the orders of the ld CIT(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, which granted relief to M/s. Maikal Breweries Pvt Ltd. for the assessment years 2011-12 and 2012-13. The revenue contended that substantial documents were produced before the ld CIT(A) which were not examined by the Assessing Officer, and that the reasoning in the ld CIT(A)'s orders was unsubstantiated. The assessee defended the relief granted by stating that all additions in the assessment order were explained in depth before the ld CIT(A). The Tribunal found the ld CIT(A)'s orders to be cryptic and non-speaking, leading to the decision to set aside these orders and remand the issues back for a detailed examination.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 300296 (ITAT-CUTTACK)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 2 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-01-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 15-01-2023
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 22-10-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BEFORE AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD), Central Circle, Sambalpur PAN/GIR No. (Appellant Assessee by Per Bench These are the ld CIT(A) 0752/2016-17 respectively. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE S/SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(ss)A Nos.139 & 140/CTK/20 Assessment Years :2011-12 & 2012 Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD), Central Circle, Sambalpur Vs. M/s. Maikal Breweries Pvt Ltd., Harishankar road, Lathore, Bolangir PAN/GIR No.AADCM 1165 C (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Assessee by :S/ Shri Binod Kumar Agarwal/Vikash Kumar Agarwal, CAs Revenue by : Shri M.K.Gautam, Date of Hearing : 16 /01 Date of Pronouncement : 16/01 O R D E R These are appeals filed by the revenue against the the ld CIT(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, dated 22.2.2018 in Appeal No. 17 for the assessment years, 201 Page1 | 4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /CTK/2018 12 & 2012-13 M/s. Maikal Breweries Pvt Ltd., Harishankar road, Lathore, Respondent) Kumar Agarwal/Vikash Kumar Agarwal, M.K.Gautam, CIT DR 01/2023 /01/2023 against the separate orders of in Appeal No.0751 & for the assessment years, 2011-12 & 2012-13, IT(ss)A Nos.139 & 140/CTK/2018 Assessment Years :2011-12 & 2012-13 Page2 | 4 2. Shri M.K.Gautam, ld CIT DR appeared for the revenue and S/Shri Binod Kumar Agarwal/Vikash Kumar Agarwal, ld ARs appeared for the assessee. 3. It was submitted by ld CIT DR that substantial documents have been produced before the ld CIT(A), which have not been examined by the Assessing Officer. It was the further submission that the orders of the ld CIT(A) are unsubstantiated insofar as the reasoning given by the ld CIT(A) in granting relief to the assessee itself is not coming out of the orders of the ld CIT(A). 4. In reply, ld ARs submitted that the ld CIT(A) has granted relief to the assessee only after considering the written submissions and detailed paper book filed before him. It was the submission that each and every addition in the assessment order had been explained in depth before the ld CIT(A). It was the submission that the assessee is not in control of how the ld CIT(A) should pass his order. It was the submission that the orders of the ld CIT(A) are liable to be upheld. 5. Both the sides have also placed before us detailed arguments in regard to share application money received by the assessee and disallowed by the AO and deleted by the ld CIT(A). IT(ss)A Nos.139 & 140/CTK/2018 Assessment Years :2011-12 & 2012-13 Page3 | 4 6. We have considered the rival submissions and also perused the orders of the ld CIT(A) and in such complicated issues, it is surprising that the ld CIT(A) has passed a cryptic order without giving any reasons nor considering any of the arguments of the Assessing Officer or the assessee. A perusal of the order of the ld CIT(A) shows that he has only extracted the gist of the first page of the assessment order, cut and paste the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in Form No.35 as also the written submissions filed by the assessee and in 10 lines has given a finding that the alleged shareholders are income tax payers and some are assessed to income tax from 15 to 20 years. He has not even attempted to examine any of the evidences produced much less the cash flow. This being so, clearly, these orders of the ld CIT(A) are non-speaking orders. This being so, we set aside the orders of the ld CIT (A) and restore the issues to his file for re-adjudication and passing a speaking order on all the issues in appeal. 7. In the result, both the appeals of the revenue stand partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 16/01/2023. Sd/- sd/- (Arun Khodpia) (George Mathan) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 16/01/2023 B.K.Parida, SPS (OS) IT(ss)A Nos.139 & 140/CTK/2018 Assessment Years :2011-12 & 2012-13 Page4 | 4 Copy of the Order forwarded to : By order Sr.Pvt.secretary ITAT, Cuttack 1. The Appellant : Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD), Central Circle, Sambalpur 2. The Respondent: M/s. Maikal Breweries Pvt Ltd., Harishankar road, Lathore, Bolangir 3. The CIT(A)-2, Bhubaneswar 4. Pr.CIT-, Sambalpur 5. DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. Guard file. //True Copy//