9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (11) TMI 1192X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not a case of change of accounting system, which is not sufficient to disclose the mind of the ITAT while deciding the appeal. Reasons are the bridge between the facts, circumstances on one side and the conclusion on the other, in absence of which, a judicial order becomes a lifeless piece of paper. As relying on KRANTI ASSOCIATES PVT. LTD. VERSUS MASOOD AHMED KHAN [ 2010 (9) TMI 886 - SUPREME COURT] and the principles of natural justice, this Court has no hesitation to hold that the impugned order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, is non-speaking. Least that is expected of an appellate judicial authority vested with such wide powers is to record reasons so that it s mind is disclosed thereby informing the aggrieved person the e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... contained in para 7 of the impugned order. It is further submitted that the mind of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is reflected therein, and therefore, the order cannot be termed to be non-speaking. 4. Accordingly, this Court after hearing learned counsel for the rival parties frames the following substantial question of law:- "Whether the impugned order dated 06.11.2020 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Indore Bench in ITA No.164/Ind/2018 in unlawful for being nonspeaking in as much as not containing enough reasons to disclose the mind of the appellate authority to save it from being sacrificed at the alter of principle of natural justice?" 5. Considering the nature of substantial question framed above, this appeal does n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 9. The Apex Court in Kranti Associates Private Limited and another Vs. Masood Ahmed Khan and others, (2010) 9 SCC 496 has held thus:- 47. Summarizing the above discussion, this Court holds: (a). In India the judicial trend has always been to record reasons, even in administrative decisions, if such decisions affect anyone prejudicially. (b). A quasi-judicial authority must record reasons in support of its conclusions. (c). Insistence on recording of reasons is meant to serve the wider principle of justice that justice must not only be done it must also appear to be done as well. (d). Recording of reasons also operates as a valid restraint on any possible arbitrary exercise of judicial and quasi-judicial or even administrative powe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reasons or `rubber-stamp reasons' is not to be equated with a valid decision making process. (m). It cannot be doubted that transparency is the sine qua non of restraint on abuse of judicial powers. Transparency in decision making not only makes the judges and decision makers less prone to errors but also makes them subject to broader scrutiny. (See David Shapiro in Defence of Judicial Candor (1987) 100 Harward Law Review 731-737). (n). Since the requirement to record reasons emanates from the broad doctrine of fairness in decision making, the said requirement is now virtually a component of human rights and was considered part of Strasbourg Jurisprudence. See Ruiz Torija Vs. Spain, (1994) 19 EHRR 553, at 562 para 29 and Anya vs. Un ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
