2014 (2) TMI 1445 - AT - Income Tax

Denial of exemption u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) - assessee is imparting education for earning profit - CIT(A) allowed assessee appeal - HELD THAT - CIT(A) has decided this issue in a cryptic and non speaking manner by referring to some Tribunal decisions and judgments of various High Court and Supreme Court by stating that the issue is covered in favour of the assessee by these judgments but we have seen that those judgments are not rendering any help to the assessee on merit and CIT(A) has also not pointed out as to how the issue in dispute is covered in favour of the assessee by these judgments. There was none present on behalf of the assessee before us to represent his case. Under these facts we feel that in the interest of justice the matter should go back to the file of CIT(A) for fresh decision and hence we set aside the order of learned CIT(A) and restore the matter back to the file of CIT(A) for fresh decision. CIT(A) should pass a speaking and well reasoned order after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to both the sides. Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

Summary

The Revenue filed an appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for the assessment year 2007-08. The main issue was whether the assessee, who was imparting education, was entitled to exemption under section 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Revenue contended that the Assessing Officer was correct in adding income over expenditure, while the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ruled in favor of the assessee, citing judgments of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court. However, the Appellate Tribunal found that the judgments referred to were not directly applicable to the issue at hand and that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) had not provided sufficient reasoning for his decision. As the assessee did not appear before the Tribunal, the matter was remanded back to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for a fresh decision after providing both parties with an opportunity to be heard. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.The key issues considered in the judgment were:1. Whether the assessee was entitled to exemption under section 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.2. Whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) provided sufficient reasoning for his decision.The Appellate Tribunal analyzed the legal framework and precedents cited by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), including judgments of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court and the Supreme Court. The Tribunal found that the judgments referred to were not directly relevant to the issue of exemption under section 10(23C)(iiiad) and that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) had not adequately explained how these judgments supported his decision. As the assessee did not appear before the Tribunal, the matter was remanded back to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for a fresh decision.The significant holdings of the judgment were:1. The judgments cited by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) were not directly applicable to the issue at hand.2. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was directed to provide a speaking and well-reasoned order after allowing both parties an opportunity to be heard.3. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.In conclusion, the Appellate Tribunal found that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) had not provided sufficient reasoning for his decision to grant exemption to the assessee under section 10(23C)(iiiad) and remanded the matter back for a fresh decision.