Decision not merely mean the ‘conclusion’ it includes reasons forming basis for conclusion

 Section 250(6) of the Act mandates that the order of the CIT(A) while disposing of the appeal shall be in writing and shall state the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reason for the decision. As is apparent from the impugned order, in our opinion, the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) is cryptic and grossly violative of one of the facets of the rules of natural justice, namely, that every judicial/quasi-judicial body/authority must pass reasoned order which should reflect application of mind by the concerned authority to the issues/points raised before it.The requirement of recording of reasons and communication thereof has been read as an integral part of the concept of fair procedure and safeguard to ensure observance of the rule of law. We may point out that a ‘decision’ does not merely mean the ‘conclusion’. It embraces within its fold the reasons forming basis for the conclusion.[Mukhtiar Singh Vs. State of Punjab,(1995)1SCC 760(SC)]. In view of the foregoing, we consider it fair and appropriate to set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and restore the issues raised in ground nos.1 to 3 in the appeal to his file for deciding the matter afresh in accordance with law, after allowing sufficient opportunity to both the parties. Needless to say that while redeciding the appeal, the learned CIT(A) shall pass a speaking order, keeping in mind, inter alia, the mandate of provisions of sec. 250(6) of the Act. With these observations, ground nos. 1 to 3 are disposed of.

 INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI

ITA no.4598/Del. /2011 – Assessment year: 2008-09

Assistant CIT  Vs. Shri Subhash Chander

Date of pronouncement 22-06-2012 

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.