Case Law Details
HC held that We do not see how it is possible for us to uphold the order of the Tribunal and when it purports to decide two Appeals of the Revenue by single paragraph conclusion. There is absolutely no discussion of the law and why the coordinate Bench decision rendered at Delhi is either distinguishable on facts or inapplicable. There is no discussion, much less any finding and conclusion that the order of the First Appellate Authority is perverse or is contrary to law. There are no infirmities, much less serious errors of fact and law noted by the Tribunal in the order of the Commissioner, which the Tribunal is obliged to and which order is therefore interfered by the Tribunal. Why the Tribunal feels it is its duty and obligation to interfere with the order of the First Appellate Authority, therefore, should be indicated with clarity. We have also not seen a reference to any communication or to any document which would indicate that the six queries raised by the Tribunal on the assessee have not been answered, much less satisfactorily. The Tribunal should have, independent of the statements, referred to such of the materials on record which would disclose that the assessee has entered into such arrangements so as to avoid the obligation to deduct the tax at source. If the arrangements are sham, bogus or dubious, then such a finding should have been rendered. Therefore, we are most unhappy with the manner in which the Tribunal has decided these Appeals. We have no alternative but to set aside such order and when the last fact finding authority misdirects itself totally in law. It fails to perform its duty. It has also not rendered a complete decision. Once the Tribunal was obliged in law to examine the matter and reappraise and re appreciate all the factual materials, then it should have performed that duty satisfactorily and in terms of the powers conferred by law.
Once this duty is not performed, we can safely come to the conclusion that the Tribunal’s order is vitiated by not only total non application of mind but also misdirection in law. We accordingly conclude and proceed to set aside the impugned order. We direct the Tribunal to hear the Appeals afresh on merits and in accordance with law after giving complete opportunity to both sides to place their versions and arguments. The Tribunal shall frame proper points for its determination and consideration and render specific findings on each of them. The Tribunal should carry out this exercise uninfluenced by any observations or conclusions in the impugned order which we have quashed and set aside. We clarify that beyond emphasizing what is the real controversy and which question goes to the root of the matter, we have not expressed any opinion on the rival contentions. All of them are open for being raised before the Tribunal. Once the two Appeals succeed and the Tribunal’s order is set aside, nothing survives in the Writ Petitions and the same are disposed of.
Full Text of the High Court Judgment / Order is as follows:-
1. The assessee has filed these Appeals aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bench at Mumbai, dated 31st March, 2015.
2. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal decided two Appeals of the Revenue bearing ITA Nos. 5389 & 5390/Mum/2013 for the assessment years 2009- 2010 and 2010- 2011.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
