THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2), AHMEDABAD vs. MUNDRA INTERNATIONAL CONTAINER TERMINAL PVT. LTD., KUTCH

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2170/AHD/2017Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 February 2019AY 2009-103 pages

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

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the impugned order was indeed infructuous because the basis for it, the Section 263 order, had been dismissed by a coordinate bench. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed as infructuous.

What were the facts?

The revenue's appeal was against an order of the CIT(A) which deleted additions made by the AO. The AO's order was passed after the PCIT revised the original assessment order under Section 263. The assessee argued that since the revision order under Section 263 was already dismissed by a coordinate bench, the current appeal had become infructuous.

What were the issues?

Whether the revenue's appeal is infructuous as the underlying revision order under Section 263 has been dismissed by a coordinate bench.

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, “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: SHRI WASEEM AHMED&

For Appellant: Shri Santosh Karnani, Sr. D.R
For Respondent: Shri S. N. Soparkar & Ms
Pronounced: 14.02.2019

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.2170/Ahd/2017 (Assessment Year 2009-10) The ACIT, Vs. Mundra International Container Circle – 2(1)(2), Terminal Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad. New Mundra Port, Navinal Island, Post Box No.8, Mundra Kutch.

[PAN No. AADCA 0917 C] (Appellant) (Respondent) ..

Appellant by : Shri Santosh Karnani, Sr. D.R. Respondent by : Shri S. N. Soparkar & Ms. Urvashi Sodhan, A.R. 13.02.2019 Date of Hearing Date of Pronouncement 14.02.2019 O R D E R PER Ms. MADHUMITA ROY - JM: The instant appeal filed by the revenue is against the order dated 03.07.2017 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – 2, Ahmedabad under section 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) arising out of the order dated 13.12.2016 passed by the Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle – 2(1)(2), Ahmedabad for the Assessment.

ITA No.2170/Ahd/2017 ACIT vs. Mundra International Container Terminal Pvt. Ltd. Asst. Year. 2009-10 - 2 - 2. The brief facts leading to this case is this that the return of income for A.Y. 2009-10 was filed by the assessee on 17.09.2009 declaring loss of (-) Rs.14,82,20,958/- was completed Under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C of the Income Tax Act (the Act) on 23.05.2013 determining the total loss of (-) Rs.13,99,64,931/- which was set aside by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Ahmedabad u/s 263 of the Act on 21.03.2016 with the direction upon the Learned AO to reframe the assessment with regard to the wrong allowance of depreciation on the “Infrastructure Usage Facility”. Consequently, the order dated 13.12.2016 was passed by the Learned DCIT, Circle – 2(1)(2), Ahmedabad with certain additions which in appeal was deleted by the Learned CIT(A)-2, Ahmedabad. Hence, the instant appeal before us.

3.

Simultaneously, the order passed u/s 263 dated 21.03.2016 by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Ahmedabad was challenged before the Hon’ble ITAT. The appeal preferred by the assessee in respect of the order u/s 263 passed by the PCIT was disposed of in favour of the assessee by the Learned Tribunal by and under order dated 23.01.2017 in ITA No.1253/Ahd/2016 for A.Y. 2009-10.

4.

In that view of the matter, the Learned Advocate appearing for the assessee at the time of hearing of the matter submitted before us that since the very basis of this order impugned before us being the order u/s 263 dated 21.03.2016 was dismissed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Hon’ble Tribunal, the order impugned before us dated 03.07.2017 become infructuous and thus

ITA No.2170/Ahd/2017 ACIT vs. Mundra International Container Terminal Pvt. Ltd. Asst. Year. 2009-10 - 3 - the same is liable to be dismissed as infructuous. The DR conceded such factual aspect of the matter.

5.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we find that the order impugned is infructuous and thus the same is thus dismissed as infructuous.

6.

In the result, revenue’s appeal is dismissed as infructuous. This Order pronounced in Open Court on 14/02/2019

Sd/- Sd/- ( WASEEM AHMED ) ( Ms. MADHUMITA ROY ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated /02/2019 Priti Yadav, Sr.PS आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 2. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 3. संबं�धत आयकर आयु�त / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु�त(अपील) / The CIT(A)-2, Ahmedabad. 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड� फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, स�या�पत ��त //True Copy// उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.Registrar) आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad

More judgments on Section 263

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →