SHRI RATAN SINGH THAKUR,SAGAR vs. PR, COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JABALPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 10/JAB/2021Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur20 September 2023AY 2011-123 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the AO, in a subsequent order, had accepted the assessee's contention, rendering the appeal against the PCIT's Section 263 order academic. The assessee's counsel did not press the grounds of appeal.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against an order passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The PCIT had held the Assessing Officer's (AO) assessment order as erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue. However, the AO subsequently passed an order accepting the assessee's claim.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal against a Section 263 order is maintainable when the subsequent AO's order has already accepted the assessee's claim, making the appeal academic.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263,Section 143

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JABALPUR BENCH, JABALPUR

For Appellant: Shri H.S.Modh, Adv
For Respondent: Shri Shravan Kumar Gotru, CIT DR
Hearing: 14/09/2023Pronounced: 20/09/2023

O R D E R PER OM PRAKASH KANT, A.M.: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 25.03.2021 passed by Ld. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Jabalpur-1 [in short “Ld. PCIT” ] for the assessment year 2011-12, holding the assessment order passed by Assessing Officer (in short “AO”) as erroneous in so far as prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue in terms of section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”). The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:-

1. “That the Ld.Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax grossly erred in facts and circumstances of the case to set-aside the de- novo.

2. That the observation of the Ld.Pr.CIT that the Assessing Officer was fail to make enquiry is not justified. 3. That the wrong provision applied by the Assessing Officer cannot be a reason for set-aside the assessment order de- novo. 4. That the Assessee craves leave to raise any other ground/s on or before the date of hearing to prove that the order passed by the Ld. Pr. CIT is bad.” 2. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that in the assessment order passed by the AO in 22.03.2022 in terms of section 143 r.w.s 263 of the Act, claim of the assessee has been accepted and therefore, the appeal against the order of section 263 of the Act is merely rendered academic.

3.

We have heard Ld. Authorized Representatives of the parties on issue in dispute and perused the material available on record. Since in the order passed by the AO consequent to the order u/s 263 of the Act passed by Ld. PCIT, the AO has already accepted the contention of the assessee and no addition has been made, therefore, the present appeal of the assessee against the order u/s 263 of the Act, is merely rendered academic. Ld. Counsel for the assessee did not press the grounds raised and accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as infructuous.

4.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 20/09/2023.

More judgments on Section 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →