TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2008 (11) TMI 64
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ppellate Tribunal") in Income Tax Appeal No. 5686/M/04 in respect of the assessment year 2001-2002. 3. We admit this appeal and frame the following substantial question of law for consideration leaving all other questions open for reconsideration since the matter is being remanded to the Tribunal for the reasons recorded. Substantial Question of Law: "Whether the impugned order passed by the Appellate Tribunal after more than four months from the date of hearing without dealing with propositions and case laws relied by the Appellant suffers from non application of mind and non consideration of material on record and therefore bad in law?" Submissions and Consideration: 4. The learned counsel for the Appellant brought a distur....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e findings of C.I.T.(A) are just, fair and in accordance with the law can hardly tantamount to giving reasons. The absence of reasons has rendered the impugned order of the Tribunal unsustainable. 7. The reasons introduced clarity in an order. The requirement of indicating reasons has been judicially recognised as imperative by the Apex Court in the case of Suga Ram v. State of Rajasthan (2006) 8 SCC 641. 8. The above view was reiterated by the Apex Court in the case of Jawahar Lal Singh v. Naresh Singh (1987) 2 SCC 222. The Court has also referred to the judgment of Lord Denning, M.R. in Breen v. Amalgamated Engg. Union, wherein the Court observed : "The giving of reasons is one of the fundamentals of good administration". In Shri Sw....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rt to see whether or not the adjudicator has proceeded on the relevant consideration, material and evidence. 11. Having said so, the inordinate unexplained delay in pronouncement of the impugned judgment has also rendered it vulnerable. 12. The learned counsel for the appellant has referred to various judgments of the Apex Court as well as of this Court and various other High Courts to show that only on the ground of delay in rendering the judgment for period ranging from four months to 10 months, judgments were held to be bad in law and set aside. It has been held time and again that justice should not only be done but should appear to have been done and that justice delayed is justice denied. Justice withheld is even worse tha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the matter of pronouncement of judgments by the High Courts. 15. In the case of Devang Rasiklal Vora v. Union of India, 2003 (158) E.L.T. 30(Bom.)=2004 (3) BCR 450, the Division Bench of this Court to which one of us is a party (Daga, J.) had an occasion to issue directions to the President of the Central Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai to frame and lay down the guidelines on the similar lines as were laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Anil Rai v. State of Bihar (supra) and to issue appropriate administrative directions to all the Benches of the said Tribunal. The similar guide-lines can conveniently be laid down for the courts, tribunals and quasi-judicial authorities prescribed under the I....