the respondent.
The issue which falls for consideration is whether the learned Tribunal
was justified in setting aside the order passed by the Commissioner of Income
Tax (Appeals) -15, Kolkata [CIT(A)], dated 10 th October, 2019, by which the
CIT(A) affirmed the order passed by the Assessing Officer dated 30 th March,
2015 under Section 143(3) of the Act. The learned Tribunal has elaborately
considered the factual position and faulted the manner in which the
assessment was completed by observing that it was a cryptic order without
discussing the facts of the matter nor the submissions made by the assessee
nor the documents produced by the assessee to prove the three factors,
namely, identity, genuineness of the transactions and creditworthiness of the
subscribers. Learned Tribunal also found that though such documents were
once again produced before the CIT(A), but the same were not referred to nor
any defect or discrepancy was pointed out under the said documents. Apart
from that, the learned Tribunal has also pointed out that there are factual
mistakes by the CIT(A) while passing the order which are contrary to the
conclusion arrived at by the Assessing Officer. Learned Tribunal took note of
the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in PCIT vs. NRA Iron & Steel (P) Ltd.
and noted that the principles which were summed up in the said decision when
a case is considered under Section 68 of the Act. After noting the said decision,
the learned Tribunal examined the factual position and found that the initial
burden casted upon the assessee has been discharged inasmuch as the
assessee had produced the documents to prove the identity of the subscribers,
the genuineness of the transaction and creditworthiness of the subscribers. If
such was the factual position then in terms of the order passed by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court, the burden shifts on the department to prove the contrary. For
doing so, it is necessary that the Assessing Officer should embark upon a fact
finding exercise which, unfortunately, the Assessing Officer did not do in the
instant case. The revenue cannot deny the fact that the order of assessment, as
observed by the learned Tribual, is a cryptic order.