Full Text
ITA 474/2016
JANAK RAJ ARORA PROP.KWALITY TEXTILES Appellant
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OFINCOME TAX-9„...Respondent
SIKANDER LAL KUMAR PRO.M/S SIKANDER LAL RAKESH
KUMAR& CO. ' Appellant .
-Through: Dr.Rakesh Gupta,Mr.Somil Agarwal,Mr.RohitKurnar Gupta and
. - Ms. Mpnika Ghai, Advocates for-the Appellants.
- Mr. Ashok, K. Manchanda, Senior Standing Counsel and Ms. Lakshmi Gurung,Advocate for Respondent.
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE NAJMIWAZIRI
07.12.2016
ORDER
1. The appellants' grievance is that even while directing the remand in these cases,theITAT has not applied its mind,in regard to the facts ofthese two cases. It is pointed outthat the grounds on which the Tribunal remitted, for consideration to the AO(in ITA No.475/2016)are,in fact,related tothe son i.e. who is an,appellant in ITA No. 474/2016'(Janak Raj Arora). The ITAT after quoting the fmdings,viz-a-viz son Janak Raj Arpra, held in the:Case of father Shri.Sikander Lai Kumar that the lorder,required to, be rerhitted..; 2016:DHC:8404-DB
2. Counsel for the Revenue submitted that broadly the conclusions ofthe ITAT with respect to the non-application ofmind and the conjectural nature offindings by the CIT(A)cannot be disputed and thattoo much error in the recording ofthe orders cannot be made outofthe orders recorded.
3. We have considered these submissions of the parties and also the record.It is quite evident that apartfrom the egregious errors, which appear in record in paras 23-25 of the impugned order, the Tribunal has also recorded inconsistent directions. At one place, it remitted the matter for consideration to the AO whereas in another, it remanded the matter to the CIT(A)[para 44].
4. Having regard to these circumstances,impugned orders are hereby set aside and the matter is remitted for fresh consideration andjudgment to the ITAT, which shall proceed further in the appeal after giving due notice to the parties., '
5. The appeals are allowed in the above terms.
S.RAVINDRA BHAT,J. [I WAZIRI,J. DECEMBER 07,2016 sb