THE TIRUCHIRAPALLI DISTRICT CENTRAL CO-OP BANK LTD.,TRICHY vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), TRICHY

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1107/CHNY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 July 2026AY 2013-145 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A)-NFAC order was without jurisdiction as the appeal had already been adjudicated and attained finality. The Faceless Appeal Scheme is procedural and cannot confer jurisdiction to re-adjudicate a concluded appeal.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a cooperative bank, filed an appeal for AY 2013-14. The CIT(A) had previously disposed of the appeal on 17.04.2018. However, a subsequent order was passed by the CIT(A)-NFAC on 04.12.2025 for the same assessment year.

What were the issues?

Whether a second appeal adjudication by CIT(A)-NFAC is valid when the appeal was already disposed of by the jurisdictional CIT(A) prior to the Faceless Appeal Scheme coming into force.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 154

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI

Before: SHRI ABY T. VARKEY & MS. PADMAVATHY.S

For Respondent: Ms. R.Anita, CIT

आदेश / O R D E R

PER PADMAVATHY.S, A.M: This appeal by the assessee is against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, (in short "CIT(A)") passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act") dated 04.12.2025 for Assessment Year (AY) 2013-14.

2.

The assessee is a cooperative bank headquartered in Tiruchi and having 58 branches across Tiruchirapalli, Karur and Ariyalur Districts. The assessee filed a return of income for AY 2013-14 on 29.09.2013 declaring loss of Rs.

ITA Nos.1107/Chny/2026 Thiruchirappalli District Central Co-op. Bank Ltd. :- 2 -:

18,92,92,078/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and the statutory notices were duly served on the assessee. The A.O completed the assessment assessing income at Rs.63,11,62,383/-. Aggrieved, the assessee filed further appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A)-NFAC passed the impugned order confirming the various additions/disallowances made by the A.O. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of the CIT(A).

3.

The Ld. Authorized Representative (AR) of the assessee, at the outset, submitted that the impugned order is a duplicate appellate order since the CIT(A)-1, Tiruchirapalli has already disposed off of the appeal vide order dated 17.04.2018. The Ld. AR further submitted that in the said order the CIT(A) gave partial relief to the assessee and the Department has preferred an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) on 29.06.2018. The Ld. AR also submitted that the impugned order in the present appeal is a duplicate appellate order passed by the CIT(A)-NFAC dated 04.12.2025 for same AY. In this regard, the Ld. AR presented the following table containing the decision of the CIT(A) vide order dated 17.04.2018 and the decision of CIT(A)-NFAC vide order dated 04.12.2025:

4.

The ld AR submitted that the revenue has preferred an appeal before the Tribunal against the order of the CIT(A) dated 17.04.2018 towards the relief given to the assessee and the same is pending for disposal. The Ld. AR

ITA Nos.1107/Chny/2026 Thiruchirappalli District Central Co-op. Bank Ltd. :- 3 -:

further submitted that once the CIT(A) has disposed off of the appeal on merits by the order dated 17.04.2018, the CIT(A)-NFAC has become functos officio qua that appeal. It is further argued that the act confers no power of review on the first appellate authority and the only post disposal power is limited power of rectification of mistake apparent on record u/s. 154 of the Act. It is further argued upon passing of order dated 17.04.2018, the assessment order dated 31.03.2016 merged into the order of the first appellate authority to the extent of the issues decided and therefore there is no surviving or pending appeal against the assessment order for the CIT(A)-NFAC to adjudicate. Accordingly, it is submitted that the impugned order operates upon a nonexistent list and is a nullity. The Ld. AR drew our attention to the Notification No.76 of 2022 date 25.09.2020 where the scheme of faceless appeal proceedings were notified to submit that the migration there under operates only in respect of appeals pending as on the notified date. The Ld. AR submitted that the present appeal having been disposed off on 17.04.2018 well before the scheme came into force was not an appeal which was pending and therefore could neither be validly migrated nor re-adjudicated by CIT(A)- NFAC. The Ld. AR accordingly submitted that the impugned order is thus without any authority.

5.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. It is an undisputed fact that the appeal against the impugned assessment order had already been adjudicated on merits by the jurisdictional CIT(A) vide order dated 17.04.2018. Admittedly, the said order was neither set aside nor recalled by any competent authority, nor was the matter restored to the file of the CIT(A) by the Tribunal or the Hon'ble High Court. Consequently, the first appellate proceedings had attained finality.

ITA Nos.1107/Chny/2026 Thiruchirappalli District Central Co-op. Bank Ltd. :- 4 -:

Accordingly upon passing the appellate order dated 17.04.2018, the jurisdiction of the first appellate authority in respect of the said appeal stood exhausted and the appellate authority became functus officio, except to the limited extent of exercising statutory powers expressly conferred under the Act. In the absence of any order setting aside the earlier appellate order or restoring the appeal for fresh adjudication, no appeal remained pending before the first appellate authority. The scheme of the Act contemplates only one adjudication by the first appellate authority against a particular assessment order and in the absence of any statutory provision enabling a concluded appeal to be reopened or re-adjudicated, the jurisdiction of the first appellate authority cannot be exercised a second time in respect of the very same assessment order.

6.

The Faceless Appeal Scheme, 2020, notified vide CBDT Notification No. 76/2020 dated 25.09.2020 under section 250(6B), merely prescribes the procedure for disposal of appeals pending before the first appellate authority through the National Faceless Appeal Centre. The Scheme is procedural in nature and cannot be construed as conferring jurisdiction upon the CIT(A)- NFAC to re-adjudicate an appeal that had already been finally disposed of prior to its commencement. Since the appeal had already been decided on merits on 17.04.2018 and had not been restored by any competent appellate forum, there was no pending appeal which could have been assigned to the CIT(A)-NFAC under the Scheme. In view of the above, the order dated 04.12.2025 passed by the CIT(A)-NFAC in respect of the very same assessment order is without jurisdiction, being a second first appellate order passed after the appeal had already been adjudicated on merits and had attained finality. The impugned order is, therefore, void in law and liable to be

ITA Nos.1107/Chny/2026 Thiruchirappalli District Central Co-op. Bank Ltd. :- 5 -:

quashed. Accordingly, we quash the impugned order dated 04.12.2025 passed by the CIT(A)-NFAC. Consequently, the appellate order dated 17.04.2018 passed by the jurisdictional CIT(A), until being set aside, recalled or modified by any competent appellate forum, would remain operative and binding in accordance with law.

7.

In result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.

Order pronounced on 17th day of July, 2026 at Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/- (एबी टी. वक�) (पदमावती यस) (ABY. T. Varkey) (Padmavathy.S) लेखा सद�य सद�य /Accountant Member लेखा लेखा लेखा सद�य सद�य �याियक सद�य �याियक सद�य / Judicial Member �याियक �याियक सद�य सद�य चे�नई/Chennai, �दनांक/Dated: 17th July, 2026. EDN, Sr. P.S Digitally signed by EJTADA DURGA आदेश क� �ितिल�प अ�े�षत/Copy to: EJTADA DURGA NARESH NARESH Date: 2026.07.21 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 17:37:30 +05'30' 2. ��थ�/Respondent 3. आयकर आयु�/CIT, Chennai/Madurai/Coimbatore/Salem 4. िवभागीय �ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड� फाईल/GF

More judgments on Section 154

All 8,676 judgments and leading authorities on Section 154 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →