Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2015 (10) TMI 470

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the assessee. However, the CIT in exercise of his revisional jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act found that there was increase in the share capital to the extent of Rs. 34,36,04,000/-. The CIT came to the conclusion that the Assessing Officer has not verified the details. The CIT also found that the share application money to the extent of Rs. 18 crores was pending for allotment and this was also not verified by the Assessing Officer. The CIT further found that reserve and surplus, unsecured loan, mobilization advance, sundry creditors, excess payment to the extent of Rs. 67.8 crores etc. were also not verified by the Assessing Officer. According to the ld. Counsel, all the details referred to by the CIT were examined by the Assessing Officer a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....se of effectively prosecuting the appeal/revisional remedy before the higher authorities, the Assessing Officer is bound to record the reasons for the conclusion reached in the assessment order. Unless and until the reasons are recorded in the assessment order, the appellate/judicial authorities may not be in a position to appreciate the order of the Assessing Officer. 6. We find that the Hon'ble P&H High Court had an occasion to examine this issue in CIT vs Sunil Kumar Goel [2005] 274 ITR 53. The P&H High Court, after considering the judgment of the Constitutional Bench of the Apex Court in S.N.Mukherjee vs Union of India, AIR 1990 SC 1984, has observed as follows: " In S.N.Mukherjee v. Union of India, AIR 1990 SC 1984, a Constitution Be....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ned to look at things objectively uninfluenced by considerations of policy or expediency whereas an executive officer generally looks at things from the stand point of policy and expediency. Reasons, when recorded by an administrative authority in an order passed by it while exercising quasijudicial functions, would no doubt facilitate the exercise of its jurisdiction by the appellate or supervisory authority. But the other considerations, referred to above, which have also weighed with this court in holding that an administrative authority must record reasons for its decision, are of no less significance. These considerations show that the recording of reasons by an administrative authority serves a salutary purpose, namely, it excludes c....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... necessity of giving reasons flows as a necessary corollary from the rule of law which constitutes one of the basic principles of the Indian Constitutional set-up. The administrative authorities having a duty to act judicially cannot therefore decide on considerations of policy or expediency. They must decide the matter solely on the facts of the particular case, solely on the material before them and apart from any extraneous considerations by applying pre-existing legal norms to factual situations. Now the necessity of giving reasons is an important safeguard to ensure observance of the duty to act judicially. It introduces clarity, checks the introduction of extraneous or irrelevant considerations and excludes or, at any rate, minimises ....