ESSEL MINING & INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), MUMBAI
In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that a previous order by the Tribunal had already quashed the PCIT's revision order under Section 263. Since the basis of the subsequent proceedings was nullified, the present appeal was rendered infructuous.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal was against an order passed by the CIT(A) for AY 2009-10. This order stemmed from a revision order passed by the PCIT under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessment order, which was a consequence of a quashed revision order, survives. The validity of proceedings initiated based on a void revision order.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI
ORDER
PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM:
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -47, Mumbai [ in short ‘the CIT(A)’] dated 10/06/2022 for the Assessment Year 2009-10.
Shri Yogesh Thar appearing on behalf of the assessee submitted at the outset that the impugned order emanates from the assessment order passed consequent to the revision order passed by PCIT u/s. 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( in short ‘ the Act’). The Tribunal in vide order dated 15/11/2022 has quashed the order of PCIT passed u/s. 263 of the Act, hence, the subsequent proceedings arising there from does not survive.
Shri Harishankar Lal representing the Department fairly admitted that the order of the PCIT passed u/s. 263 of the Act has been set aside by the Tribunal.
Both sides heard. It is an admitted fact that revision order passed u/s. 263 of the Act by the PCIT has been quashed by the Tribunal. The present appeal by the assessee germinates from the assessment order passed in consequence to the revision order u/s. 263 of the Act. Since, order u/s. 263 of the Act has been quashed, the proceedings arising there from are vitiated. Consequently, the present appeal by the assessee has become infructuous, hence, the same is dismissed as infructuous.
Order pronounced in the open court on Monday the 28th day of November, 2022.
More judgments on Section 263
- Gillette India Limited, Mumbai vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, JaipurITA 1316/JPR/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Neo Structo Construction P. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The Pr. CIT- 3, AhmedabadITA 1216/AHD/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Vimal Harilal Baldania, Gandhidham vs The ITO Ward 2, GandhidhamITA 770/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1493/KOL/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1492/KOL/2026[2013-2014]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2013-2014
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sushama Mishra vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Saudamini Samantray vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Bhubaneswar IiOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Keshav Rice Mill, Ganjam vs. Chief Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, KatakaOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Nanda Contruction PVT. LTD., Angul vs. Additional Commissioner, GST And Central Excise Commissionerate, SundergarhOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Utkal Suppliers,Ganjam vs. Assistant Commissioner Of CT And GST, Ganjam-I Circle,GanjamOrissa · 28 Oct 2026