TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (1) TMI 1382
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r completed the assessment after making proper enquiry. In fact, the Assessing Officer called for the details pertaining to confirmation of business loss, payment made to Registrar of Companies, claim of depreciation on goodwill, operational expenses, etc. The Principal Commissioner in exercise of his revisional power under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') found that the Assessing Officer has not discussed and verified the claim of the assessee. Therefore, according to the Ld. counsel, he found that the order of the Assessing Officer is erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of Revenue. According to the Ld. counsel, the Principal Commissioner directed the Assessing Officer to disallow the claim of the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ioner has rightly exercised his revisional jurisdiction. 4. We have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the relevant material available on record. We have carefully gone through the order of the assessment. The Assessing Officer has not discussed anything in the assessment order with regard to issues arising for consideration. The contention of the Ld.counsel for the assessee is that the Assessing Officer called for details and the same were filed before him. Therefore, there was presumption that the Assessing Officer applied his mind to the facts of the case and accepted the case of the assessee. This Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the proceeding before the Assessing Officer being a judicial proceeding,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....diction of this court under article 136 of the Constitution as well as the supervisory jurisdiction of the High Courts under article 227 of the Constitution and that the reasons, if recorded, would enable this court or the High Courts to effectively exercise the appellate or supervisory power. But this is not the sole consideration. The other considerations which have also weighed with the court in taking this view are that the requirement of recording reasons would (i) guarantee consideration by the authority; (ii) introduce clarity in the decisions; and (iii) minimise chances of arbitrariness in decision making. In this regard a distinction has been drawn between ordinary courts of law and tribunals and authorities exercising judicial fun....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r facts and circumstances. What is necessary is that the reasons are clear and explicit so as to indicate that the authority has given due consideration to the points in controversy. The need for recording of reasons is greater in a case where the order is passed at the original stage. The appellate or revisional authority, if it affirms such an order, need not give separate reasons if the appellate or revisional authority agrees with the reasons contained in the order under challenge." In Testeels Ltd. v. N. M. Desai [1970] 37 FJR 7; AIR 1970 Guj 1, a Full Bench of the Gujarat High Court has made an extremely lucid enunciation of law on the subject and we can do no better than to extract some of the observations made in that decision. T....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dministrative officer within the limits of the law. The result would be that the power of judicial review would be stultified and no redress being available to the citizen, there would be insidious encouragement to arbitrariness and caprice. If this requirement is insisted upon, then, they will be subject to judicial scrutiny and correction." If the order passed by the Tribunal is scrutinised in the light of the aforementioned proposition of law, we do not find any difficulty in setting aside the same on the ground of violation of the rules of natural justice. The flowery language used by the Tribunal to justify its acceptance of the respondent's plea that he did not know the law does not warrant our affirmation. In our opinion, the ....