2023 (1) TMI 284 - HC - Income Tax
Manner in which the Tribunal had disposed of the appeal - Unutilized MODVAT credit - Whether Tribunal was justified in law in making the addition in respect of unutilized MODVAT credit for the relevant previous year without even considering that the treatment for accounting of MODVAT credit applied by the appellant was in accordance with the approved method of accounting duly approved by the ICAI and has been regularly followed by the appellant? - HELD THAT:- As on a closure scrutiny we find that the Tribunal has abrogated its responsibility in its entirety which is heavily cast upon the learned Tribunal being the last factfinding authority in the hierarchy of authorities. By way of illustration we can point out that in paragraph 11 of the order passed by the Tribunal, the findings rendered by the CIT(A) has been adopted by the Tribunal verbatim as its own findings and so much so, even the directions given by the CIT(A) to the Assessing Officer has been copied verbatim.
We find that though the Tribunal has recorded that it had heard the submissions of the learned authorised representative of the assessee as well as the department representative, the submissions made by the authorised representative have not been noted or recorded. Tribunal has stated that the authorised representative has given detailed submission on behalf of the assessee which are all contained in detail in the order of the CIT(A) and, therefore, need not be repeated again. It is seen that all the grounds which have been canvassed before the Tribunal have been dealt with in the very same fashion.
Also we note from the impugned order that the Tribunal has verbatim extracted the grounds raised by the parties and in paragraph 60 the Tribunal has held as follows:
“We have examined the rival submissions. We find no infirmity in the order of the CIT(A) which is confirmed. The appeal of the assessee is dismissed on the 10th ground.”
In a similar fashion the other grounds have also been dealt with as could be seen from paragraph 73 to 79. Thus, it is clear that the order passed by the Tribunal is without any application of mind and suffers from utter perversity. In fact, the order of the learned Tribunal is a classical example of as to how an order should not be drafted. We are informed that though the assessee had filed a miscellaneous application with a prayer to decide all issues by passing a reasoned order, such application was dismissed by the learned Tribunal on the ground that it would tantamount to review.
Thus, we are fully satisfied that the order of the Tribunal has to be set aside in its entirety. In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue as well as the assessee are allowed and the order passed by the Tribunal is set aside and remanded to the Tribunal for fresh consideration.