VUNNAM NARASIMHA RAO,VIJAYAWADA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 2(1), VIJAYAWADA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the order passed by the Assessing Officer under Section 143(3) read with Section 263 was appealable before the CIT(A) and not the ITAT. Therefore, the appeal filed before the ITAT was not maintainable.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT against an order passed by the Assessing Officer. The Department pointed out that the appeal was not maintainable before the ITAT as the order was appealable before the CIT(A).
What were the issues?
The primary issue was the correct forum for filing an appeal against an order passed by the Assessing Officer under Section 143(3) read with Section 263 of the Income Tax Act.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM
Before: SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE & SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, HON’BLE
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 433/VIZ/2012 (Asst. Year : 2007-08) Vunnam Narasimha Rao, vs. ACIT, Circle-2(1), C/o P.V. Subba Rao, CA, Vijayawada. D.No. 29-4-8, K.R. Reddy Street, Governorpet, Vijayawada. PAN No. AARPV 1129 N (Appellant) (Respondent)
Assessee by : Shri P.V. Subba Rao – FCA. Department By : Shri D.K. Sonawal – CIT DR
Date of hearing : 19/08/2019. Date of pronouncement : 23/08/2019. O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax, Vijayawada, dated 27/01/2012 for the Assessment Year 2007-08. 2. When this appeal is taken up for hearing, ld.DR has pointed that as Form No.36 at column No. 2, the appeal filed by the assessee is not maintainable for the reason that the order passed by the Assessing Officer is subsequent to the order passed u/sec.
2 ITA No.433 /VIZ/2012 (Vunnam Narasimha Rao)
263 of the Act, therefore it is an appealable order and appeal has to be filed before the ld. CIT(A) and not before the ITAT. 3. On the other hand, ld.AR has submitted that the appeal has to be filed before the ld. CIT(A), however, mistakenly the appeal is filed before the ITAT and submitted that same may be sent to the ld. CIT(A) to decide the appeal on merits of the case. 4. We have heard both the sides, perused the material available on record and orders of the authorities below. 5. We find that the impugned order passed by the Assessing Officer u/sec. 143(3) r.w.s. 263, dated 27/09/2012 is an appealable order before the ld. CIT(A) and therefore appeal has to be filed before the ld. CIT(A) and not before the ITAT. In view of the above, impugned order challenged before the Tribunal is not maintainable, hence the same is dismissed with a liberty to file the appeal before the ld. CIT(A). If assessee files appeal before the ld. CIT(A), the ld. CIT(A) considered the delay liberally and pass the orders on merits in accordance with law. 6. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed Order Pronounced in open Court on this 23rd day of August, 2019. Sd/- sd/- (D.S. SUNDER SINGH) (V. DURGA RAO) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 23rd August, 2019.
3 ITA No.433 /VIZ/2012 (Vunnam Narasimha Rao)
vr/- Copy to: 1. The Assessee – Vunnam Narasimha Rao, C/o P.V. Subba Rao, CA, D.No. 29-4-8, K.R. Reddy Street, Governorpet, Vijayawada. 2. The Revenue – ACIT, Circle-2(1), Vijayawada. 3. The CIT, Vijayawada. 4. The D.R., Visakhapatnam. 5. Guard file. By order
(VUKKEM RAMBABU) Sr. Private Secretary, ITAT, Visakhapatnam.
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 →- M/S Utkal Highways, Bidanasi vs. Union Of INDIAOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Pradeep Kumar Behera vs. Superintendent CGST And Central Excise., CuttackOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Manas Behera vs. Commissioner, CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Pramod Kumar Nayak vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, KendraparaOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Nirmal Kumar Sharma S/O Ram Swroop Sharma vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 16 Oct 2026