LANCO GROUP LIMITED, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-16(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD
In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the assessee's appeal had become infructuous due to the subsequent assessment order. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed as rendered infructuous.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal arose from an order passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) under Section 263. The Assessing Officer (AO) subsequently framed a consequential assessment without making any disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D(ii).
What were the issues?
Whether the appeal is rendered infructuous due to a subsequent assessment order passed by the AO following a PCIT's Section 263 order.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD ‘B’ BENCH, HYDERABAD.
O R D E R Per S.S. Godara J.M. : This assessee’s appeal arises from the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-4, Hyderabad’s order dt.30.03.2017 passed in proceedings under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’).
Heard both parties. Case file perused.
It transpires during the course of hearing that in consequence to the PCIT’s section263 order under challenge, the Assessing Officer has framed his consequential assessment on 14.12.2017 in proceedings u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act without making any disallowance u/s. 14A r.w. Rule 8D(ii) of the Income Tax Rules. We therefore hold that the assessee's instant appeal stands rendered infructuous as on date. We order accordingly. It is further made clear that nothing shall preclude the assessee to take all legal remedies available under the law, if any.
This assessee's appeal is dismissed as rendered infructuous in foregoing terms. Order pronounced in the open court on 3rd Sept., 2021.
More judgments on Section 263
- Gillette India Limited, Mumbai vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, JaipurITA 1316/JPR/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Neo Structo Construction P. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The Pr. CIT- 3, AhmedabadITA 1216/AHD/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Vimal Harilal Baldania, Gandhidham vs The ITO Ward 2, GandhidhamITA 770/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1493/KOL/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1492/KOL/2026[2013-2014]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2013-2014
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Tyre Center vs. The Superintendent Of CGSTAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Monolith Resorts Private Limited vs. The CommissionerUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Sutlej Textiles And Industries Limited vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S. Ut Corp vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 26 Oct 2026
- Sunrise Engineering vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026