Late Night hearings by CIT (Appeals) Reduces Working Efficiency, Resulting into Misleading Order: ITAT [Read Order]

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT)  in the case of Shri Shanmugam Senthilkumar vs. The Income Tax Officer ordered Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)  to elaborate on the reasons for the late-night hearing which was considered as a breach of onerous duty as it reduces working efficiency and as a consequence passing of a misleading order.

The petitioner named Shri Shanmugam Senthilkumar who was the Ld. counsel for the assessee was of the contention that a person who appeared before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was the office staff and not the Chartered Accountant. And the  Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was negligent in making the note of this fact and as a consequence disposed of the appeal without taking into consideration the material facts on record. Also, the petitioner contended that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) used to make practitioners wait for a long duration i.e. from 9 PM to 10 PM and passed such misleading and erroneous order.

Further, it was also contended that instead of passing a speaking order the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) disposed of the appeal on the basis of summarization of the material facts by the assessing officer.

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) comprising of S. Jayaraman, Accountant Member, and N.R.S. Ganesan, Judicial Member allowed the appeal by passing an order stating that the order passed by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is set aside. Further the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is under the onerous duty of imparting justice cannot Working Efficiency in a negligent manner. Wherefore, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was asked to give reasons for passing such kind of order. Also with regards to making practitioners wait from 9 PM to 10 PM needs to be avoided and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) needs to confine the hearing in the working hours only.