INCOME TAX OFFICER-6(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. FANCY GLASS INDUSTRIES PVT LTD, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2968/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 July 2026AY 2015-163 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 held that if the revision order under Section 263 is quashed, the consequential assessment order passed based on it becomes null and void. Therefore, the CIT(A)'s decision to treat the appeal as infructuous was upheld.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order which held that the assessment order passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 263 was void. This was because the Section 263 revision order, which was the basis for the reassessment, had been quashed by a coordinate bench of the Tribunal.

What were the issues?

Whether an assessment order passed consequent to a Section 263 revision order becomes void if the revision order itself is quashed.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 263,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “F” BENCH; MUMBAI

Hearing: 02.07.2026Pronounced: 09.07.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH; MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 2968/Mum/2026 (Assessment Year: 2015-16)

Income Tax Officer-6(3)(1), Fancy glass Industries Pvt. Mumbai Ltd. Aayakar Bhawan, M K Marg, vs. 43, Foras Road, R S Nimkar Churchgate, Mumbai, Marg, Mumbai, MUMBAI, Maharashtra, 400020. Maharashtra, 400008 PAN:AAACF5500H (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Ketan Vajari, CA For Revenue : Ms. Tsering Majumder, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 02.07.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 09.07.2026 O R D E R PER VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M : This is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [‘Ld.CIT(A)’], dated 06.01.2026, pertaining to Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16.

2.

Briefly, the facts of the case are that the assessee has filed its return of income declaring total income of Rs. 21,25,410/- which was selected for scrutiny and the assessment proceedings were completed u/s. 143(3) of the Act, vide order dated 13.12.2017. Subsequently, the revision proceedings were initiated by the ld. PCIT, u/s. 263 of the Act and the order dated 30.03.2021 was passed setting aside the original

ITA No. 2968/Mum/2026; A.Y. 2015-16 Fancy glass Industries Pvt. Ltd. assessment, with the direction to reframe the assessment de novo. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer passed the order u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 263 r.w.s. 144B, vide order dated 29.03.2022, assessing the income at Rs.54,92,750/-. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and it was submitted that the revision order so passed u/s. 263 of the Act by the ld. PCIT has since been quashed by the Coordinate Mumbai Benches vide its order dated 15.05.2023 in ITA No. 938/Mum/2021 and once the order u/s. 263 is quashed, the consequential assessment order passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 263 r.w.s. 144B of the Act does not survive.

3.

The ld. CIT(A) taking into consideration the submissions so filed by the assessee recorded his finding stating that the impugned assessment order dated 29.03.2022 has been passed solely in consequence of the revision order u/s. 263 of the Act and which has been quashed by the Tribunal and once the foundation itself has been removed, the consequential assessment order becomes null and void in the eyes of law. Accordingly, the appeal is rendered infructuous and is rejected as such. Against the said order, the Revenue is in appeal before us.

4.

Heard both the parties and considered the material available on record. We find no legal infirmity in the order so passed by the ld. CIT(A), wherein he has stated that once the revision order u/s. 263 of the Act has been quashed and set-aside by the Coordinate Bench, the consequent assessment order becomes null and void in the eyes of law.

5.

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed.

Order pronounced on 09.07.2026 Sd/- Sd/- PAWAN SINGH VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER)

ITA No. 2968/Mum/2026; A.Y. 2015-16 Fancy glass Industries Pvt. Ltd.

Mumbai, Dated: 09.07.2026 Karishma J. Pawar, SR. PS

Copy to : 1) The Appellant 2) The Respondent 3) The CIT concerned 4) The D.R, ITAT, Mumbai 5) Guard file

By Order

Dy./Asst. Registrar I.T.A.T, Mumbai

More judgments on Section 263

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →