TMI Blog2013 (9) TMI 489X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ar 2008-09. 2. There is a delay of 101 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal. The assessee filed an application to condone the delay. According to the ld.representative, immediately after receipt of the impugned order of the Administrative Commissioner, a scanned copy was mailed to the income- tax consultant for filing the appeal. However, due to some technical error, the copy was not received by the Chartered Accountant, therefore, appeal could not be prepared and filed. According to the ld.representative, the assessee was under the impression that the Chartered Accountant would prepare and file the appeal in time which was not materialised due to the above reasons. The ld.representative pleaded that due to the above reasons, there was a reasonable cause for not filing the appeal in time. We heard the ld.DR also. Having heard the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case we find that the assessee had forwarded the copy of the impugned order of the Administrative Commissioner to the Chartered Accountant for preparing the appeal. However, it appears that there was a communication error and the appeal could not be prepared and filed in time. Therefore ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AIR 1990 SC 1984 has observed as follows: " In S.N. Mukherjee v. Union of India, AIR 1990 SC 1984, a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court discussed the development of law on this subject in India, Australia, Canada, England and the United States of America and after making reference to a large number of judicial precedents, their Lordships culled out the following propositions (page 1995): "The decisions of this court referred to above indicate that with regard to the requirement to record reasons the approach of this court is more in line with that of the American Courts. An important consideration which has weighed with the court for holding that an administrative authority exercising quasi-judicial functions must record the reasons for its decision, is that such a decision is subject to the appellate jurisdiction of this court under article 136 of the Constitution as well as the supervisory jurisdiction of the High Courts under article 227 of the Constitution and that 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 a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ai (1970) 37 FJR 7; AIR 1970 Guj 1, a Full Bench of the Gujarat High Court has made an extremely lucid enunciation of law on the subject and we can do no better than to extract some of the observations made in the decision. The same are (headnote of AIR 1970 (Guj)): "The necessity of giving reasons flows as a necessary corollary from the rule of law which constitutes one of the basic principles of the Indian Constitutional set- up. The administrative authorities having a duty to act judicially cannot therefore decide on considerations of policy or expediency. They must decide the matter solely on the facts of the particular case, solely on the material before them and apart from any extraneous considerations by applying pre-existing legal norms to factual situations. Now the necessity of giving reasons is an important safeguard to ensure observance of the duty to act judicially. It introduces clarity, checks the introduction of extraneous or irrelevant considerations and excludes or, at any rate, minimizes 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 Cou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dropping the proceedings. The Tribunal referred to certain aspects and held that the initiation of proceedings under section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, "the I.T. Act") was impermissible when considered in the background of the materials purportedly placed by the assessee before the Assessing Officer. What the High Court has done is to require the Assessing Officer to pass a reasoned order. The High Court was of the view that the Tribunal could not have substituted its own reasonings which were required to be recorded by the Assessing Officer. According to the assessee, all relevant aspects were placed for consideration and if the officer did not record reasons, the assessee cannot be faulted. We do not think it necessary to interfere at this stage. It goes without saying that when the matter be taken up by the Assessing Officer on remand, it shall be his duty to take into account all the relevant aspects including the materials, if any, already placed by the assessee, and pass a reasoned order." 7. We also find that the Allahabad High Court in a recent unreported judgment expressed its shock and anguish the way in which the assessment orders and the revisional ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty can know why the decision has gone against him. One of the salutary requirements of natural justice is spelling out reasons for the order made; in other words, a speaking-out. The "inscrutable face of the sphinx" is ordinarily incongruous with a judicial or quasi-judicial performance." A feeble argument was advanced that the Commissioner of Income Tax being higher in hierarchy than Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, the initiation of the proceedings at the instance of Additional Commissioner of Income Tax is bad. In view of our above conclusion that the order dropping the proceeding under section 12A was not a valid action on the part of the Commissioner of Income Tax, the said argument is rejected. Having regard to what has been said above. We find that it is a case where the then Assessing Officer (Shri Bhopal Singh), the Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-II, Muzaffarnagar and Shri Kundan Misra, the then Commissioner of Income Tax, Muzaffarnagar who passed the order dated 25.1.2008 have abdicated their duties. The Court in the exercise of supervisory jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India cannot be a mute spectator. Such actio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
