Dy. CIT v. Vintage Enterprises (2023)108 ITR 10 (SN)(Pune) (Trib)

S. 253 : Appellate Tribunal-Appeals-Memorandum of appeal-Two assessment orders-Contends are different-Matter remanded to Commissioner (Appeals) to verify and adjudicate de novo complying with principles of natural justice-Principal Chief Commissioner is directed to make a thorough enquiry.[S. 143(3), 250]

 

Held, allowing the appeals filed by the Department and the assessee, that the case records provided considerable amount of clarity and validity regarding the facts and circumstances of each case in matters of any ambiguity on enquiry. On examination, the contents of paragraph 8 as appearing in the assessment order in the case record matched the contents of paragraph 8 of the assessment order filed by the Revenue in its appeal memo. Therefore, without any doubt the correct assessment order had to be the one as appearing in the case record. Neither the assessee nor Department could demonstrate through evidence which assessment order had been considered for adjudication by the Commissioner (Appeals). Firstly, it had to be ascertained whether or not the Commissioner (Appeals) in passing the order had placed reliance on the correct assessment order and secondly, how a wrong assessment order could have been sent to the assessee by the Department. If the Commissioner (Appeals) had adjudicated on the basis of the wrong assessment order, his order had to be quashed as non est and the correct assessment order had to be restored. Therefore, the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) was to be set aside and remanded to his file to verify the issues and adjudicate de novo complying with the principles of natural justice. The Principal Chief Commissioner was directed to make a thorough enquiry taking the enquiry to its complete logical end in upholding the principles of fair play, justice and judiciousness.(AY.2008-09)