SHELADIA ASSOCIATES INC,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-2, HYDERABAD

Coming to the assessee's sole substantive grievance that both the lower authorities have erred in law and on facts in exercising their 154 jurisdiction, we note that the Assessing Officer’s consequential order dt.4.1.2019 in issue had not taken into consideration order in its yet another 154 petition dt.5.3.2012 accepted on 10.05.20212. The Assessing Officer observes that the same is not considered since “it is not clear as to on what basis the assessee's claim was allowed.” We find no merit in the Revenue’s instant stand as the Assessing Officer’s impugned consequential order has no jurisdiction to ignore an order duly passed in assessee's favour in rectification jurisdiction. Nor could the assessing authority be held to have any jurisdiction for question of correctness thereof on merit or on legality; as the case may be. We therefore accept the assessee's instant sole substantive grievance for this precise reason alone. The CIT(A)’s order under challenge affirming the Assessing Officer’s action to this is held as not sustainable in law therefore.