9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (5) TMI 1252X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... regarding issues raised by the Commissioner. Hence, it shows non- application of mind by the Assessing Officer. Therefore, recording of the reasons is all the more mandatory for the appellate/revisional authorities to appreciate the reasons for the conclusions reached by the AO in his order. It is a well settled principle of law that the reasons for conclusion reached in a judicial order shall contain in the impugned order itself. In other words, reason for the conclusion arrived in a judicial/administrative order cannot be substituted by way of filing additional document or affidavit before the higher forums. Appeal of the assessee is dismissed. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... That does not mean that the Assessing Officer has not examined the same. Similarly, the sales commission and the payment made in violation of Section 40A(3) of the Act, VAT returns, charity and donation, job work charges were all examined by the Assessing Officer. Referring to the commission said to be paid by the assessee, the Ld. representative submitted that it is not correct to say that the assessee has paid commission of 28.32% on domestic sales. No one could pay the commission of 28.32%. According to the Ld. representative, the commission paid was only 3% to 5%. Therefore, the Commissioner has wrongly assumed the jurisdiction. 4. On the contrary, Shri Joe Jebastian, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that during the course of assessment, the assessee claimed expenditure for payment of sales commission, donation, job work charges, etc. The assessee has also made certain payments in violation of Section 40A(3) of the Act. The Ld. D.R. further submitted that the assessee has not included the Duty Drawback to the extent of ₹ 3,50,04,823/- in the income. The Ld. D.R. further submitted that the assessee has shown sundry creditors in the year ended 31.03.2011 at & ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , recording of the reasons is all the more mandatory for the appellate/revisional authorities to appreciate the reasons for the conclusions reached by the Assessing Officer in his order. It is a well settled principle of law that the reasons for conclusion reached in a judicial order shall contain in the impugned order itself. In other words, reason for the conclusion arrived in a judicial/administrative order cannot be substituted by way of filing additional document or affidavit before the higher forums. In this case, admittedly, the Assessing Officer has not discussed anything in the assessment order regarding issues raised by the Commissioner. Hence, it shows non- application of mind by the Assessing Officer. This Tribunal found that the Apex Court in the case of Toyota Motor Corporation v. CIT (2008) 306 ITR 52 (SC) had an occasion to consider an identical issue wherein the Apex Court observed as follows:- "We are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order of the High Court. The High Court has held that the Assessing Officer had disposed of the proceedings stating the penalty proceedings initiated in this case under section 271C read with section 274 of the Incometax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat 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 functions on the ground that a judge is trained 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 quasi-judicial 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 f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ns and excludes or, at any rate, minimises arbitrariness in the decision-making process. Another reason which compels making of such an order is based on the power of judicial review which is possessed by the High Court under article 226 and the Supreme Court under article 32 of the Constitution. These courts have the power under the said provisions to quash by certiorari a quasi-judicial order made by an administrative officer and this power of review can be effectively exercised only if the order is a speaking order. In the absence of any reasons in support of the order, the said courts cannot examine the correctness of the order under review. The High Court and the Supreme Court would be powerless to interfere so as to keep the administrative 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 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
