PAWAN KUMAR AGARWAL,NEW DELHI vs. PR-CIT-12, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1359/DEL/2020Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 April 2022AY 2016-172 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal observed that the assessee was no longer aggrieved by the revisional order and had waived any objection. Therefore, the appeal was rendered infructuous.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against a revisional order passed under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The revisional order had sought to set aside the assessment order passed under Section 143(3) r.w. Section 153A.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal against a revisional order under Section 263 is maintainable when the assessee is no longer aggrieved by it.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263,Section 143(3),Section 153A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “F” DELHI

Before: SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA & SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY

For Appellant: Shri Satish Agarwal, CA, Shri Dharender Kumar, CA
For Respondent: Shri T. Kipgen, CIT-DR

PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, A.M.: The captioned appeal has been filed at the instance of the assessee against the revisional order of the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-XII, Delhi (‘Pr.CIT’ in short) dated 10.06.2020 passed under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) whereby the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer under Section 143(3) r.w. Section 153A of the Act was sought to be set aside for reframing the assessment in terms of supervisory jurisdiction.

2.

When the matter was called for hearing, ld. counsel for the assessee placed assessment order passed under Section 143(3) r.w. Section 153A of the Income Tax Act and submitted that the impugned assessment order was passed in consequence of the revisional order passed under Section 263 of the Act under challenge, wherein the assessed income subjected to revisional jurisdictional has not been disturbed and accepted without any demur. It was however fairly submitted that the Assessee is no longer aggrieved by the revisional order.

3.

Having considered the waiver offered on behalf of the Assessee, we straightaway observe that the captioned appeal challenging the revisional action of the competent authority under Section 263 is rendered infructuous owing to the fact that no prejudice to the assessee subsists any more. We thus do not consider it expedient to indulge in such academic exercise in order to save the judicial time.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as infructuous.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 21/04/2022.

More judgments on Section 263

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →