INCOME TAX OFFICER-15(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. AGNIJWAALA ELECTRONICS SUPPLIERS PRIVATE LIMITED , NAVI MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5486/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 May 2026AY 2018-194 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 affirmed the CIT(A)'s order, finding no infirmity in restoring the matter to the AO for fresh adjudication on merit. The Tribunal agreed that the CIT(A)'s action was in accordance with the amended provisions of Section 251(1)(a) of the Act.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order which restored the matter to the AO for fresh adjudication. The assessee initially argued that the original assessment order was superseded by a reassessment order, but later contended that both orders could coexist and sought adjudication on merit.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in restoring the assessment to the AO instead of deciding on merit, and whether the principle of merger applied to the assessment orders.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 147,Section 144B,Section 251(1)(a),Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

1.

This appeal by Revenue is directed against the order of ld. CIT(A) dated

01.09.2025for Assessment Year (AY) 2018-19. The Revenue has raised following

grounds of appeal:

“1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred by setting aside the assessment order under section 144 of Act, because it had already been superseded by the reassessment order under section 147 read with section 144B and action of the CIT(A) is a direct violation of the principle of merger, under which the original order ceases to exist upon the completion of a reassessment?

2.

Whether on the facts and circumstances of case and in law, the CIT(A)'s decision to set aside the original assessment order is contradictory and legally untenable, as the appeal against the subsequent and operative reassessment order u/s 147 was dismissed and the dismissal of the appeal against the reassessment order makes it

Agnijwaala Electronics Suppliers Private Limited ITA No. 5486/M/2025 (AY: 2018-19) the only valid and enforceable order for the assessment year, rendering any action on the superseded original order void?. 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of this case and in law, the CIT(A) failed to appreciate the superior nature of the reassessment order, which was based on specific factual findings of bogus transactions u/s 68 and this order, derived from concrete evidence, should have been given precedence over the original best- judgment assessment u/s 144, which was based on a mere estimation of income?.”

2.

Rival submissions of both the parties have been heard and record perused. The

ld. Senior Departmental Representative (ld. Sr. DR) for the Revenue submits that

ld. CIT(A) restored the matter back to the file of Assessing Officer (AO) instead

of deciding the issue on merit. Thus, the appeal may be restored back to the file

of ld. CIT(A) for adjudication on merit.

3.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee despite the service of notice of appeal

of more than two occasions. Thus, we are deciding the appeal on the basis of

material available on record and considering the submission of ld. Sr. DR.

4.

We find that assessment was completed under section 144B on 18.06.2021 r.w.s.

147.

The AO while passing the assessment order noted that assessee has not

submitted any response to various notices. The AO rejected the books of account

and estimated income of assessee @8.00% of total turnover of Rs. 70.58 crore.

Aggrieved by the additions in the assessment order, the assessee filed appeal on

12.11.2022. There was delay of 482 days in filing appeal before ld CIT(A). The

delay in filing appeal was condoned. We find that while filing submissions before

ld CIT(A), the assessee its submission dated 17.12.2024 submitted that

assessment order passed under section 144 dated 18.06.2021, has been

superseded by subsequent reassessment order passed under section 147 on

Agnijwaala Electronics Suppliers Private Limited ITA No. 5486/M/2025 (AY: 2018-19) 14.03.2024. Thus, the appeal against the order dated 18.06.2021 have become

infructuous and the assessee made request to withdraw the appeal. In

subsequent submission dated 10.05.2024, the assessee stated that under

bonafide belief that assessment order under section 144 dated 08.06.2021 is

superseded and they make prayer for a withdrawal of appeal. However, on

obtaining legal advice and on more comprehensive understanding, the earlier

request for withdrawal was based on erroneous interpretation of law and that

order under section 144 and under section 147 are independent and can coexist,

subject to adjudication on merit. Thus, their earlier request for withdrawal may

be disregarded and appeal may be adjudicated on merit on the interest of

justice. The assessee is filing independent appeal against the subsequent

reassessment order passed under section 147. The assessee further stated that

due to Covid-19 pandemic, the business operation of assessee became non-

functional. Staff and employee responsible for compliance and tax obligation

resigned. Their books are audited and no defect is pointed out. The assessee is

in the business of wholesale trade of electronic devices including televisions,

mobile phones, and computer accessories. We find that the ld. CIT(A) on

considering the submission of assessee restored the matter back to the file of AO

for fresh adjudication on merit and to determine correct income. We find that

there is no infirmative in the order of ld. CIT(A) which is in accordance with

amended provision of section 251(1)(a), thus, we affirmed the order of ld.

CIT(A). In the result, grounds of appeal of Revenue are dismissed.

Agnijwaala Electronics Suppliers Private Limited ITA No. 5486/M/2025 (AY: 2018-19)

5.

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

Order was pronounced in the open Court on18/05/2026.

/- S/- /- SSd/- Sd/- GIRISH AGRAWAL PAWAN SINGH ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

Mumbai, Dated: 18/05/2026 Biswajit

Copy of the order forwarded to: (1) The Assessee; (2) The Revenue; (3) The PCIT / CIT (Judicial); (4) The DR, ITAT, Nagpur; and (5) Guard file. By Order

Assistant Registrar / DDO ITAT, Mumbai

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →