Non-speaking rectification order set aside as reasons and factual objections were ignored; matter remitted for fresh consideration.

A rectification order was set aside because it was non-speaking, did not address the relevant facts, including payment or part-payment of demand, and ignored the legal contentions and authorities cited by the taxpayer. The Court declined to resolve the dispute on assumptions where the order lacked reasons and factual examination. It remitted the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration after hearing the taxpayer, and the assessee obtained relief.

---

---

Issues: Whether the rectification order was liable to be set aside for being non-speaking and for not dealing with the factual contentions and case law, and whether the matter should be remitted for fresh consideration.

Analysis: The rectification order did not discuss the relevant facts, the effect of payment or part-payment of demand, or the legal contentions raised by the petitioner. It was passed without reasons and without examining the authorities relied upon. In such a situation, the Court declined to decide the controversy on hypothetical assumptions and found it appropriate to restore the matter to the Assessing Officer for a fresh decision after hearing the petitioner.

Conclusion: The rectification order was set aside and the matter was remitted for fresh disposal, which was in favour of the assessee.

---