INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5-2, JAIPUR vs. M/S KRISHNA VILLA APARTMENTS, THROUGH PARTNER SHRI ARUN BANSAL, JAIPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 704/JPR/2019Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 September 2019AY 2007-084 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that since the revision order under Section 263 was quashed by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court, the consequential assessment order passed by the AO would not survive. Therefore, the revenue's appeal lacked merit.

What were the facts?

The revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order cancelling an assessment order passed under Section 263/143(3). The CIT(A) had quashed the assessment order based on a jurisdictional High Court decision that had already set aside the revision order under Section 263.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessment order passed under Section 143(3) pursuant to a Section 263 revision order is valid when the Section 263 order itself has been quashed by a higher court.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCH ‘B’, JAIPUR

Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 704/JP/2019

Hearing: 02.09.2019Pronounced: 03/09/2019

PER VIJAY PAL RAO, J.M. This appeal by the revenue is directed against the order dated 30th March, 2019 of ld. CIT (Appeals)-4, Jaipur arising from the assessment order passed in pursuant to the revision order under section 263 of the I.T. Act for the assessment year 2007-08. The revenue has raised the solitary ground as under :-

1.

“(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT (A) is justified in cancelling the assessment order passed by the AO u/s 263/143(3) dated 27.03.2014 relying upon the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court order dated 09.10.2017 in the case of the assessee wherein the Hon’ble Court has neither considered nor adjudicated on the basis of validity of the order passed u/s 263 by the CIT and upheld by the ITAT and has decided issues on merit. Against the order of the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court’s order dated 09.10.2017, department has filed SLP (C) No. 24743/2018.”

(ii) The appellant craves its rights to add, amend or alter any of the grounds on or before the hearing.

2.

The AO while passing the assessment order in pursuant to the revision order passed under section 263 of the IT Act, made certain additions and disallowances which were challenged by the assessee before the ld. CIT (A). The ld. CIT (Appeals) quashed the assessment order passed under section 143(3) read with section 263 of the IT Act in view of the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the appeal challenging the revision order under section 263 of the Act.

3.

We have heard the ld. CIT DR as well as the ld. A/R of the assessee and considered the relevant material on record. The present appeal emanates from the assessment order passed under section 143(3) in pursuant to the revision order under section 263 dated 30th March, 2013. At the outset, we note that the revision order passed under section 263 was challenged by the assessee and the matter was carried to the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court. The Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in judgment dated 9th October, 2017 has reproduced the substantial question of law in para 2 as under :-

“ Whether the order passed by the ld. Respondent under section 263 of the Act of 1961 setting aside the Order passed by the ld. Assessing Officer u/s 153C/143(3)/144 for making de-novo assessment is not illegal and bad in law ?”

The said question was decided in favour of the assessee in para 6.2 and 7 as under “ 6.2. He contended that assets were transferred in that case but in the present case assets were not transferred. 7. In view of the above, the appeal stands allowed and the issue is answered in favour of the assessee. However, it is made clear that as and when valuation of the land will be considered, the acquisition of price of Rs. 2 crores will not be considered, only the difference of Rs. 9 crores will be considered for any other purpose or for giving him benefit under the Income Tax Act.”

In view of the fact that the revision order passed under section 263 stands quashed as bad in law by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court, the consequential order passed by the AO under section 143(3) r.w. section 263 which is subject matter of appeal would not survive. Accordingly, we do not find any merit or substance in the present appeal of the revenue. However, if the revenue succeeds in the SLP filed against the order of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court then the department may take appropriate steps.

More judgments on Section 263

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →