Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, Axis Bank Foundation, filed appeals against orders of the CIT(A) which were passed consequent to revision orders u/s 263 by the PCIT. The appeals related to assessment years 2015-16 and 2016-17.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the coordinate benches had previously quashed the revision orders passed by the PCIT. Consequently, the assessment orders and the impugned orders of the CIT(A) could not survive and were set aside.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) orders sustaining assessment orders passed consequent to revision orders u/s 263 are valid when the revision orders themselves have been quashed by the Tribunal.
Sections Cited
263
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “A” MUMBAI
Before: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT & MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL
The present appeals by the assessee are directed against two separate orders, both dated 28.11.2024, passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) – National Faceless Appeal centre, Delhi [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] for AY 2015-16 and 2016-17 respectively. Identical grounds have been raised in both these
Axis Bank Foundation Axis Bank Foundation 2 & 429/MUM/2025 & 429/MUM/2025 appeals, therefore, same appeals, therefore, same were heard together and disposed off by were heard together and disposed off by way of this consolidated order. way of this consolidated order.
In both the appeals, the assessee is aggrieved with the order of In both the appeals, the assessee is aggrieved with the order of In both the appeals, the assessee is aggrieved with the order of ld CIT(A) in relation to assessment orders passed consequent to ld CIT(A) in relation to assessment orders passed consequent to ld CIT(A) in relation to assessment orders passed consequent to revision order u/s 263 passed by the PCIT. order u/s 263 passed by the PCIT.
We have heard rival submission and perused the relevant ave heard rival submission and perused the relevant ave heard rival submission and perused the relevant material on record. material on record. Before us, the Ld. counsel for the assessee Before us, the Ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that the revision orders u/s 263 of the Act passed by the the revision orders u/s 263 of the Act passed by the the revision orders u/s 263 of the Act passed by the PCIT were challenged by the assessee before the Tribunal and the PCIT were challenged by the assessee before the Tribunal and the PCIT were challenged by the assessee before the Tribunal and the coordinate bench of Tribunal ate bench of Tribunal in in for AY 2015-16 and ITA No. 1285/Mum/2021 and ITA No. 1285/Mum/2021 for AY 2016 for AY 2016-17 have quashed those revision orders quashed those revision orders . Since both the relevant . Since both the relevant revision orders of the Ld. PCIT for assessment year orders of the Ld. PCIT for assessment years 2015-16 and 2016 16 and 2016-17 stand quashed by the quashed by the Tribunal, the consequent impugned Tribunal, the consequent impugned assessment orders cannot survive. Accordingly, the order of the Ld. cannot survive. Accordingly, the order of the Ld. cannot survive. Accordingly, the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on the issue in dispute in both the assessment years are CIT(A) on the issue in dispute in both the assessment years are CIT(A) on the issue in dispute in both the assessment years are accordingly set-aside as the impugned assessment order can’t aside as the impugned assessment order can’t aside as the impugned assessment order can’t survive and same are rendere survive and same are rendered infructuous . The grounds of appeal . The grounds of appeal of the assessee in both the appeals stand in both the appeals stand allowed.
Axis Bank Foundation Axis Bank Foundation 3 & 429/MUM/2025 & 429/MUM/2025
In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed. In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed. In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed.
Order pronounced in the open Court on nounced in the open Court on 07/03/2025. /03/2025.