Case Law Details
Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court held in CIT(A) Vs M/s Rashtriya Vikas party that for passing any order reasons for conclusions should be given accompanying that order then only that order would be considered as complete order. High Court relied on the decision given in M/s Kranti Associates Pvt. Ltd. and another v. Sh. Masood Ahmed Khan and others, (2010) 9 SCC 496 that reasons would be necessary to be given while passing an order to fulfill the law of natural justice.
Facts of the case:
Assessee filed return declaring total income of Rs 3,21,596/-which was selected for scrutiny and AO completed assessment with the total income of Rs 2,93,06,330/-on account of receipt of donation. Aggrieved by which assesse filed an appeal with CIT(A) who confirmed the appeal of assesse and deleted the addition which was challenged by the revenue in tribunal who had passed order in favor of revenue but without passing reasoned speaking order so the same was dismissed and remanded back to the tribunal for fresh adjudication after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard.
Contention of the assesse:
Assessee was of the view that it was eligible to claim deduction u/s 13A so the deduction should be allowed to the assesse.
Contention of the revenue:
Revenue was of the view that assesse initially claimed that its books of accounts were lost and later on books were recovered. The order passed by the Tribunal was not a speaking order and dismissed the appeal without giving any detailed reasons for dismissing the appeal except mentioning that we find no infirmity in the findings of the CIT (Appeals). So the decision of the tribunal lacks correctness so its decision should be dismissed.
Held by High Court:
High Court held that the order passed by the tribunal did not satisfy the conditions of reasoned order as mentioned in M/s Kranti Associates Pvt. Ltd. and another v. Sh. Masood Ahmed Khan and others, (2010) 9 SCC 496. So the matter was remanded back to the tribunal for fresh order after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard. It had not given any reasons to dismiss the appeal of revenue and allow the appeal of assesse which were necessary to pass any decision.
Appeal was disposed off
