CIDER TRACOM PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 6(1), KOLKATA

ITA 2629/KOL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 September 2026AY 2015-20166 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the Assessing Officer (AO) had passed an ex parte order under Section 144 on 15.12.2017. Subsequently, the Principal CIT (Pr.CIT) exercised jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Act, setting aside the earlier order and restoring it to the AO for fresh assessment, with directions to provide a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The Tribunal also noted that a Coordinate Bench of the ITAT had restored the Pr.CIT's order for fresh adjudication. The Tribunal held that once the Pr.CIT exercised jurisdiction under Section 263 and set aside the earlier order, the earlier order lost its credential value, and no demand would sustain based on it. Therefore, the appeal of the assessee was dismissed. The Tribunal did not expressly leave any issue undecided.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Cider Tracom Pvt. Ltd., filed its return of income for Assessment Year 2015-16 on 13.09.2015, declaring a total income of ₹1,50,880/-. The case was selected for scrutiny due to large share premium received. The Assessing Officer (AO) completed the assessment under Section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, making an addition of ₹40,87,993/- and assessing the total income at ₹42,38,870/-, as the assessee did not participate in the assessment proceedings. The assessee appealed to the NFAC, Delhi (CIT(A)), who dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, noting the assessee had opted for the VSVS Scheme, 2020. The assessee then appealed to the ITAT against the CIT(A)'s order. During this period, the Principal CIT (Pr.CIT) invoked Section 263 of the Act and passed an order on 13.03.2020. This Section 263 order was challenged before the ITAT, which, by an order dated 10.11.2021, restored the proceedings to the Pr.CIT for fresh adjudication.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the assessment order dated 30.09.2021 passed under section 144 read with section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is bad in law, without jurisdiction, and liable to be quashed. (Assessee's contention: The AO's order is unsustainable as it was passed consequent to a revisionary order dated 13.03.2020, which was set aside by the ITAT. The assessee argued that in the absence of a valid Section 263 order, the assessment cannot survive. The assessee also contended that the addition of ₹75,00,000 under Section 68 was made without proper consideration of documents furnished. The assessee relied on the ITAT's order dated 10.11.2021 which restored the Section 263 proceedings for fresh adjudication and noted the failure of the Pr.CIT to implement the ITAT's directions. 2. Whether the addition of ₹75,00,000 under section 68 of the Act and the assessment of total income at ₹1,17,38,870 are without a valid jurisdictional foundation. (Assessee's contention: Similar to issue 1, the assessee argued that the assessment lacks jurisdictional foundation due to the invalidity of the preceding Section 263 order and the failure to implement the ITAT's directions. Revenue's contention: The Revenue relied on the orders of the lower authorities.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 144,Section 263,Section 253,Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA ‘SMC’ BENCH AT KOLKATA

Before: SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU

For Appellant: Adv. प्रत्यर्थी के ओर से/

PER LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed by the NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as Ld. ‘CIT(A)’] dated 13.07.2026 DIN & Order No: ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2026- 27/1091020891(1) u/s 250 of the Act arising out of the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer [hereinafter referred to as Ld. ITA No(s). 2629/KOL/2026 Assessment Year(s)

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 263

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →