SWASTIK PARADISE LLP,VARANASI vs. PCIT, ALLAHABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 16/VNS/2021Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi29 September 2023AY 2017-20182 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the time limit for the AO to pass the consequential order had expired. Therefore, adjudicating the appeal would serve no purpose.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed appeals against a revision order passed by the Principal CIT. The Assessing Officer (AO) failed to pass an order giving effect to the revision order within the stipulated time limit.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be adjudicated when the time limit for passing consequential orders has expired, rendering the appeal infructuous.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CIRCUIT BENCH : VARANASI

Before: SHRI B.R. BASKARAN & SHRI AMIT SHUKLA

For Appellant: Shri Apramay Ghabhwala
For Respondent: Shri Robin Chaudhary, CIT-DR
Hearing: 27.09.2023Pronounced: 29.09.2023

ORDER PER B.R. BASKARAN, AM: Both the appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the revision order passed by the ld.PCIT, Allahabad, u/s 263 of the Act for Assessment Years 2016- 17 & 2017-18.

2.

At the time of hearing, the ld. AR submitted that the AO has not passed the order giving effect to the above-said order and the time limit for passing the same has already expired. Accordingly, he submitted that no purpose would be served in pursuing this appeal as the AO could not pass the orders now. Accordingly, he submitted that these appeals may be disposed of as infructuous.

3.

We heard the parties and perused the record. Having regard to the submissions made by the ld. AR, we notice that no purpose would be served by adjudicating this appeal since the time limit for passing orders to give effect to the above-said revision order has already expired. Accordingly, we dismiss these appeals as infructuous.

4.

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are treated as dismissed.

More judgments on Section 263

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →