Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the Commissioner (Appeals) could sustain an order remanding the case without serving the jurisdictional Commissioner's application on the assessee, without granting a hearing, and without recording reasons; and whether such an order warranted setting aside and remand.
Analysis: The order under challenge was found to be cryptic and non-speaking. The assessee was not shown to have been served with the application made by the jurisdictional Commissioner, nor was a hearing directed. The order did not discuss the issues involved or indicate why the earlier decision of the subordinate authority and the cited appellate precedent were not being followed. Such disposal was held to reflect absence of application of mind and disregard of the requirement to pass a reasoned order after hearing the affected party.
Conclusion: The order was set aside and the matter was remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for fresh decision after supplying the application to the assessee, granting an opportunity of hearing, and passing a speaking order.
Final Conclusion: The appellate proceedings were restored to the Commissioner (Appeals) for reconsideration in accordance with law and after observance of natural justice.
Ratio Decidendi: An appellate order affecting an assessee cannot stand if it is passed without notice, without hearing, and without reasons, and such an order is liable to be set aside with remand for a fresh speaking decision.