SRI.K.G.MICHAEL,KOCHI vs. THE ITO, WD-1(3), KOCHI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The assessee's authorized representative stated that the assessee was not interested in pursuing the appeal. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, granting the assessee liberty to file an appeal against any consequential order.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal against an order passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income-tax under Section 263 of the Act. The grounds of appeal related to the order being barred by limitation and the Principal Commissioner's decision being based on a change of opinion without adequate reasons.
What were the issues?
Whether the order passed under Section 263 was barred by limitation and if it was erroneous due to a change of opinion without adequate reasons.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN
Per CHANDRA POOJARI, AM:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Pr.
CIT, Kochi u/s. 263 of the Act dated 05/12/2018 and pertain to the assessment
year 2011-12.
The assessee raised the following grounds of appeal:
1) Order u/s. 263 of the Principal Commissioner of Income-tax, Kochi is barred by limitation. Since the order is served on the appellant on 14/01/2019.
2) The Principal Commissioner of Income-tax has decided that the assessment order is erroneous due to a change of opinions and without adequate reasons.
I.T.A. No.82/Coch/2019
At the time of hearing, the Ld. AR made an endorsement that the assessee is
not interested in pursuing this appeal. However, he made it clear that the assessee
may be permitted to file appeal against the consequential order to be passed
against the impugned order passed u/s. 263 of the Act.
We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record. We dismiss the
appeal of the assessee with a liberty to the assessee to file appeal against the
consequential order to be passed against the impugned order passed u/s. 263 of
the Act.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on this 08th April, 2019
sd/- sd/- (GEORGE GEORGE K.) (CHANDRA POOJARI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Place: Kochi Dated: 08th April, 2019 GJ Copy to: 1. Shri K.G. Michael, Koppandisseril House, Thomaspuram, Maradu P.O., Kochi-682 304. 2. The Income Tax Officer, Non-Corporate Ward-1(3), Kochi.. 3. The Pr. Commissioner of Income-tax, Kochi. 4. D.R., I.T.A.T., Cochin Bench, Cochin. 5. Guard File. By Order
(ASSISTANT REGISTRAR) I.T.A.T., Cochin
I.T.A. No.82/Coch/2019
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 →- Dillip Kumar Behera vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, Mayurbhanj CircleOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Tvl.Dev Construction vs. The Proper OfficerMadras · 15 Oct 2026
- Abbal Dass Arya vs. Commissioner State Goods And Services Tax CommissionerUttarakhand · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Darbesh Medical Enterprise vs. State Of West Bengal And Ors.Calcutta · 15 Oct 2026
- Gr Infra Projects Limited Ratlam Through Its Authorized Signatory Mr. Pankaj Das vs. The State Of Madhya PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 14 Oct 2026