DCIT, CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S. BALMER LAWRIE AND CO. LIMITED, KOLKATA
In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the appeal was an abuse of the process of law as the underlying revision order was already quashed. Consequently, all subsequent proceedings and orders, including the CIT(A)'s order, were null and void.
What were the facts?
The Revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order. However, the order under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, which led to the subsequent proceedings, had already been quashed by a Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal.
What were the issues?
Whether an appeal filed against an order that is consequential to a revision order already quashed by the Tribunal is maintainable.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH KOLKATA
Before: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad
order : May 10, 2023 आदेश / ORDER संजय गग�, �या�यक सद�य �वारा / Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member: The present appeal has been preferred by the revenue against the order dated 18.11.2022 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(A)’) passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’).
We have heard the ld. counsel for the assessee and gone through the records. We find that the present appeal is nothing but the abuse of process of law. The Department has filed the present appeal in a casual and mechanical manner even without going into the question as to whether the appeal against the impugned order lies or not. The order u/s 263 of the Act has already stood quashed by the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal vide order dated 19.12.2018 passed in ITA Assessment year: 2012-13 M/s Balmer Lawrie and Co. Ltd No.1184/Kol/2017. The consequential proceedings pursuant to revision order u/s 263 of the Act would stand abated and becomes null and void. Therefore, the original assessment order/appellate order would stand and any subsequent orders passed pursuant to the revision order u/s 263 of the Act would get wiped out, to be treated as never have been passed. Therefore, there was no question of filing of appeal against the order of the CIT(A) passed in appeal against the assessment order passed in the set aside proceedings pursuant to revision order passed by the PCIT u/s 263 of the Act. The concerned PCIT has not applied his mind while casually approving the filing of the appeal before this Tribunal. In view of this, the present appeal is hereby dismissed.
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 →- M/S. V J Petro Products vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (St) - IiiAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Asian Aura vs. Government Of Nct Of Delhi And Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Shining Steel Through Its Proprietor Kartik Gupta vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Redamancy World Through Its Proprietor Sanjay Kumar Goel vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Arj Exim INDIA vs. Additional Commissioner Of CGST, Appeals-Ii, New Delhi And OrsDelhi · 27 Oct 2026