February 2011
S. 250(6) — An order passed by CIT(A) without mentioning point of determination as also without giving any reason for decision while dismissing the appeal is violative of S. 250(6).
By Jagdish D. Shah
Jagdish T. Punjabi
Chartered Accountants
Reading Time 2 mins
fiogf49gjkf0d
New Page 1Part B :
UNREPORTED DECISIONS
(Full texts of the following Tribunal decisions are available at
the Society’s office on written request. For members desiring that the Society
mails a copy to them, Rs.30 per decision will be charged for photocopying and
postage.)
13 Rang Rasayan Agencies v.
ITO
ITAT ‘C’ Bench, Ahmedabad
Before Bhavnesh Saini (JM)
and
D. C. Agrawal (AM)
ITA No. 917/Ahd./2009
A.Y. : 2004-05. Decided on :
18-1-2011
Counsel for assessee/revenue
:
Ketan M. Bhatt/Ms. Anurag
Sharma
Income-tax Act, 1961, S.
250(6) — An order passed by CIT(A) without mentioning point of determination as
also without giving any reason for decision while dismissing the appeal is
violative of S. 250(6) of the Act and cannot be sustained in law.
Per Bhavnesh Saini :
Facts :
The assessee had preferred
an appeal to the CIT(A). Due to non-appearance by the counsel of the assessee
before the CIT(A), the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. In the order
passed by the CIT(A), he did not mention the point for determination and also
did not mention the reason for decision.
Aggrieved by the order of
CIT(A), the assessee preferred an appeal to the Tribunal.
Held :
The Tribunal noted that S.
250(6) requires the CIT(A) to mention the point of determination in the
Appellate order and also the reason for decision. Since the order passed by the
CIT(A) did not mention any point of determination in the Appellate order and
also did not give any reason for decision while dismissing the appeal of the
assessee, the Tribunal held the order of the CIT(A) to be violative of S. 250(6)
of the Act and consequently unsustainable in law. The Tribunal observed that the
act of the CIT(A) in merely noting the default committed by the counsel for the
assessee in not putting appearance before him and dismissing the appeal cannot
be sustained. Accordingly, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and
restored the appeal of the assessee to the file of the CIT(A) with a direction
to re-adjudicate the appeal of the assessee on merit by giving reasons for
decision in the Appellate order.
The appeal filed by the
assessee was allowed.
