Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's twin appeals arise from orders passed by the PCIT, Noida, initiating revision proceedings under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act for AY 2014-15 and 2016-17. The PCIT's action was based on directions issued by the CIT(A) in a preceding assessment year (2012-13) concerning the taxability of revenue subsidy.
Held
The Tribunal restored the appeals back to the PCIT to await the final outcome of proceedings for assessment year 2012-13, which are pending before the Supreme Court. The assessee is at liberty to raise all contentions in the subsequent proceedings.
Key Issues
Whether the PCIT's revision proceedings under Section 263 are justified when the issue is pending adjudication before higher courts in a related assessment year.
Sections Cited
263, 251(1A)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘C’ NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA
Date of hearing 29.07.2025 Date of pronouncement 13.08.2025 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM These assessee’s twin appeals & 2642/Del/2024; in assessment years 2014-15 and 2016-17, arise against the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax [in short, the “PCIT”], Noida’s as many orders, both dated 26.03.2024 having DIN and order nos. ITBA/REV/F/REV5/2023-24/1063387563(1) and ITBA/REV/F/REV5/2023-24/1063388705(1) involving proceedings under section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), respectively. Heard both the parties. Case files perused.
We note at the outset that there is hardly much a need for us to delve into the relevant factual matrix at length, so far as correctness of learned PCIT’s impugned identical action of revision jurisdiction in the twin assessment years 2014-15 and 2016-17 terming the Assessing Officer’s as many assessments dated 30th March, 2022; as erroneous one causing prejudice to the interest of the Revenue, is concerned. This is for the precise reason that he has relied upon the CIT(A) directions in the assessee’s case in the preceding assessment year 2012-13 inter alia taxing revenue subsidy in the form of chunk of land admeasuring 6250 acres, as taxable in exercise of section 251(1A) enhancement jurisdiction. We make it clear that the CIT(A) had passed the above enhancement order dated 31st March, 2017 in the said preceding assessment years in the assessee’s case. This is what has formed the basis for the learned PCIT herein to direct the Assessing Officer to proceed afresh in the assessee’s 2 | P a g e case in both these succeeding assessment years as per the CIT(A)’s directions.
We next note with the able assistance coming from both the parties that the assessee has filed challenging correctness of the CIT(A)’s foregoing enhancement exercise in assessment year 2012-13. And that the same stands adjourned “sine die” as the tribunal’s registry has sent the entire case records to hon’ble apex court wherein the proceeding qua the very issue are stated to be pending in the Civil Appeal No. 7412/2023. This being the clinching factual position, we deem it appropriate that the larger interest of justice would be met in case the assessee’s instant twin appeals are hereby restored back to the learned PCIT to await the final outcome of the preceding assessment years proceedings i.e. AY 2012-13 subject to their lordship’s final adjudication. We order accordingly. It further made it clear that the assessee shall indeed be at liberty to raise all it’s factual as well as legal contentions; as the case may be, afresh which shall be dealt with in accordance with law.