AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (9) TMI 151
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... reading the ground. 3. That the order passed by the CIT(A) is not reasoned order and disallowance made by the assessing officer is confirm arbitrary and against the law and against the natural justice therefore liable for quash. 4. That cost (appeal fees + travelling expenses + advocate fees) may kindly be granted in respect of dragging the assessee in appeal due to negligence and carelessness of the CIT(A) in view of judgment of Rajasthan High Court delivered in case of Chiranji Lal by treating the assessee and department at par. 5. That addition of Rs. 3,51,811/- is illegal and against the law is only account of negligence. 6. Without prejudice when the income is exempt in that case no tax should be charged." 3. The fact as culled out and recorded in the orders of the lower authorities is that the assessee has filed its original return of income belatedly u/s 139(4) of the Act for the assessment year 2019-20 on 15.01.2020. The due date for filing return of income for the said assessment year u/s 139(1) of the Act was extended to 31.10.2019. The return of income filed by the appellant u/s 139(4) of the Act was processed by the CPC, Bengaluru....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....0(6) of the Act, it is the duty of the Commissioner (Appeals) to state a point in dispute, record the reasons and pass a speaking order. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kranti Associates Pvt. Ltd. v. Masood Ahmed Khan (2010) 9 SCC 49% and Canara Bank v. V. K. Awasthy (2005) SC 2090 has held that nonspeaking orders by Tribunal, as well as Commissioner (Appeals), is violating the principle of natural justice and liable to be set aside. Accordingly, under the faceless appeal scheme, the Authorities are bound to pass the speaking order. The CIT (A) fails to pass the speaking order and passed the order in ten lines AND THE TAXPAYER HAS BEEN DELIBERATELY PUSHED INTO THE PIT OF LITIGATION. YOU ARE REQUESTED TO DECLARE THE SAME AS ILLEGAL. In view of the above submission, you will observe that the addition made by the assessing officer is illegal and against the law without following the order of the tribunal. CONVERSATION OF PROOF INTO NO PROOF BY THE CIT (A) Respected sir, we fail to understand how the CIT (A) disbelieved the explanation/statements given by the assessee when both documents are the documents of CPC and converted go....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re liable for quash. The assessee took following grounds: - i) That the order passed by the Assessing Officer is illegal and against the law ii) The Assessing Officer should have accepted the revised return submitted by the assessee which was in accordance with the law iii) That the order passed by the Assessing Officer is not reasoned order and disallowance made by the Assessing Officer is arbitrary and against the law and against the natural justice iv) That the assessee was prevented by reasonable cause from furnishing the appeal within the stipulated time v) That the claim of Rs.3,51,811 is in accordance with law. Respected sir just see the CIT (A) have decided the appeal in ten lines which is being reproduce here under: - Decision-: There are five grounds of appeal but they are condensed to a single issue which is assessee's grievance against CPC disallowing a sum of Rs.3,51,811 on account of current year's losses. After looking into the entire factual matrix of the case, I find that assessee's plea is untenable because losses can only be allowed when the return of income is filed within the st....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals. This is an offense that is not condoned in the Service Conduct Rules. Many decisions are available to post on the concerned authorities, some of them are written below. I want to draw your attention to the following cases.- In view of the judgment CHARANJILAL TAK SHYAM PARWANI & PARTY vs. UNION OF INDIA & ORS reported at 252 ITR 333 (Raj), The assessee is entitled to cost. Observation is as under:- "Litigation is not a luxury and/or amusement or entertainment. It is not pleasure or pleasant to come to the courts. Only when the Union or a State or its officers make it unavoidable, do the litigants come up before the court for redressal of their grievances or for enforcement of their legal or fundamental rights? The litigation is heavily cost (sic-costs heavily) and in the matter of awarding the cost, the court should have to keep in mind this aspect in such matters. It is no use or desirable that on the success of the litigant, he has been given only the token cost or the cost for the sake of the cost of the litigation. The litigants spent a huge amount in filing litigations." Supreme Court of In....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Act may kindly be annulled the same, declared illegal, and against the judicial decorum and discipline." 5.1 The ld. AR of the assessee also filed a paper book of the documents relied upon the same is also reproduced here in below: Sr. No. Particular Page No. 1 Copy of Original ITR and Computation of Total Income A.Y 2019-20 filed on 30.10.2019 1-4 2 Copy of Revised ITR and Computation of Total Income A.Y 2019-20 filed on 15.01.2020 5-8 3 Copy of written submission dated 19.01.2023 with acknowledgment submitted before CIT(A) 9-13 5.2 In addition the above paper book and written submission so filed the ld. AR of the assessee, expressed his anguished on the lower authorities in not appreciating the facts even the same placed on record by the assessee or the same is available at the time of processing the ITR filed by the assessee. The only short issue that the original return of income was filed by the assessee on 30.10.2019 [ which is within the extended due by CBDT ] and thereafter the assessee revised the return on 15.01.2020 which CPC considered it as original return and has denied the current year loss of Rs. 3,51,811/-. This simple fac....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the revised return and therefore. in correct appreciation of the facts has resulted into extra cost to the assessee and thus, assessee prayed to award the cost. To support his contention the ld. AR of the assessee relied upon the decision of the hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Chiranji Lal Tak v. Union of India [2001] 252 ITR 333/[2002] 120 Taxman 602 he requested that cost of the appeal may please be awarded to the assessee which will act as deterrent for illegal and non-speaking orders passed by the authorities causing loss to the assessee. 10. On the other hand, the learned Departmental representative strongly opposed the argument of learned counsel for the assessee. Based on the records both the lower authorities have passed the order. He submitted that in this case there is no illegal act, as the intimation has been issued by the system considering the system based control and based on that set of even the ld. CIT(A) has recorded similar facts. He further submitted that since the matter under consideration is quasi-judicial and has not reached finality, therefore, calling the order as arbitrary and perverse would amount to pre-judging the outcome of the appe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ficer is to make a summary enquiry with a view to determine how much of what is seized will be retained by him to cover the estimated tax liability and how much will have to be returned forthwith. The object of the enquiry under sub-section (5) is to reduce the inconvenience to the assessee as much as possible so that within a reasonable time what is estimated due to the Government may be retained and what should be returned to the assessee may be immediately returned to him. Even with regard to the books of account and documents seized, their return is guaranteed after a reasonable time. In the meantime the person from whose custody they are seized is permitted to make copies and take extracts. Sixthly, where money, bullion, etc., is seized, it can also be immediately returned to the person concerned after he makes appropriate provision for the payment of the estimated tax dues under sub-section (5), and, lastly, and this is most important, the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code relating to search and seizure apply, as far as they may be, to all searches and seizures under section 132. Rule 112 provides for the actual search and seizure being made after observing normal dec....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... In that case, the respondent Income-tax Officer issued illegal notice to the petitioner and later withdrew the same. Under these circumstances, the court directed the respondent to pay for the advocate fee and litigation expenses incurred by the petitioner in prosecuting writ proceedings. However, in the instant case, there is no prim facie illegality in issuing the intimation which is also system based and even the proceeding before the first appellate authority was on faceless regime. We, therefore, do not find any merit in the argument of learned counsel for the assessee to award cost. The ground raised by the assessee is accordingly dismissed. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. Order pronounced under rule 34(4) of the Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963, by placing the details on the notice board. ============= Document 1 F.No. 225/150/2020-ITA-II Government of India Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue Central Board of Direct Taxes ***** North Block, ITA-II Division New Delhi, the 30 September,2020 Order under Section 119(2)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 The date for furnishing of Income-tax retums under section 13....